Thanks a lot guys! On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Matt Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You can push up branches to create remote branches. This is a great > way to store in-development changes that *will* get merged back into > master, and makes sharing the code trivial. >
What about branches that won't necessarily be merged back into master - i.e. if someone is writing some experimental code? In the article that you posted link to, there's this unintuitive command to remove remote branches, so is it a problem? On 16 Paź, 20:38, "GitHub Support" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > As Matt points out, branches are a wonderful thing. I can certainly > understand keeping the master branch "production ready", but why wouldn't > you want them to push branches up? > --tek > I wasn't clear - I didnt want them to push bigger changes directly to the master. One more question - how to add origin/HEAD remote branch to local repo? If I create a new public repo, then add it as a remote (origin) in my local repo and push all changes it works fine. But if I want to create a remote branch using "git push origin origin:refs/heads/ new_feature_name" I get "error: src refspec origin does not match any.". If I clone the public repo, I can see remote branch "origin/ HEAD" listed and creating remote branches works fine. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GitHub" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/github?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
