[git-users] change another branch

[ruud]

hello group,

I use git for some months. Given the way I work, I find myself doing a
certain sequence of git actions regularly. Although it isn't that much
work, I was wondering if there is a one-command way of doing it.

- branch _master_ contains the software version everybody uses
- I do all my work in branch _work_ ;
- if I am ready with my work, the branch lies one or more commits
ahead on master. If we decide the changes are ready to submit to the
repository, I want master to contain the changes and point to the same
commit as work does. I do the following:
   - I check out the master branch
   - I do 'reset --hard work' so that master point to the same commit
as work does
   - I check out work again to continue

Is the same result possible without switching to the master branch?

regards, Ruud

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Git 
for human beings group.
To post to this group, send email to git-us...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/git-users?hl=en.

Re: [git-users] change another branch

[Michael P. Soulier]

On 16/09/10 ruud said:

- I check out the master branch
- I do 'reset --hard work' so that master point to the same commit
 as work does
- I check out work again to continue

Are you not losing changes to do this? Why don't you just rebase the work
stream to sync-up with the master branch?

Mike
-- 
Michael P. Soulier msoul...@digitaltorque.ca
Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a
touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.
--Albert Einstein


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [git-users] change another branch

[Donovan Bray]

Why do you do this? 

First putting all of your work only in one branch called _work_ is extremely 
self limiting. What if you have to work on a critical bugfix but are already in 
the middle of a new feature. I would ditch that concept and begin using topic 
branches. You shouldn't have to care which sha is at the tip of a branch. You 
could just simply merge _work_ into master. Or if you want to be really clean 
rebase _work_ and squeeze all of the commits into a single commit then merge 
into master. 

Using a reset in a normal workflow just has smell to it. 

On Sep 16, 2010, at 2:52 AM, ruud r.grosm...@gmail.com wrote:

 hello group,
 
 I use git for some months. Given the way I work, I find myself doing a
 certain sequence of git actions regularly. Although it isn't that much
 work, I was wondering if there is a one-command way of doing it.
 
 - branch _master_ contains the software version everybody uses
 - I do all my work in branch _work_ ;
 - if I am ready with my work, the branch lies one or more commits
 ahead on master. If we decide the changes are ready to submit to the
 repository, I want master to contain the changes and point to the same
 commit as work does. I do the following:
   - I check out the master branch
   - I do 'reset --hard work' so that master point to the same commit
 as work does
   - I check out work again to continue
 
 Is the same result possible without switching to the master branch?
 
 regards, Ruud
 
 -- 
 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
 Git for human beings group.
 To post to this group, send email to git-us...@googlegroups.com.
 To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
 git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
 For more options, visit this group at 
 http://groups.google.com/group/git-users?hl=en.
 

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Git 
for human beings group.
To post to this group, send email to git-us...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
git-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/git-users?hl=en.