Git selective merge

Git selective merge DEFAULT

katylava/git-selective-merge.md

FYI This was written in 2010, though I guess people still find it useful at least as of 2021. I haven't had to do it ever again, so if it goes out of date I probably won't know.

Example: You have a branch that is quite different from . You can't merge all of the commits, or even every hunk in any single commit or master will break, but you have made a lot of improvements there that you would like to bring over to master.

Note: This will not preserve the original change authors. Only use if necessary, or if you don't mind losing that information, or if you are only merging your own work.

On master:

On temp:

… which stages everything, so:

Then begin adding the pieces you want:

The following is from an actual merge.

Choose for patch.

Enter the number next to the file you want to process first. You can keep entering numbers until you've selected all the files, or you can do them one at a time. An asterisk will appear next to the files you select.

When you are finished selecting files, press 'enter' without entering a number (or anything) to continue to the next step.

You will see a single diff hunk and it will ask you whether to stage it or not.

Enter to stage or to skip. This will go on for every diff hunk in the selected files until you get back to:

You can enter to see what you changed

You can quit now, so enter , Then do some status and diff commands to explore the staged vs unstaged changes and make sure it looks like you expected.

Don't forget to any untracked files as appropriate.

Commit the staged changes:

Revert the unstaged changes

And finally, merge to master:

Sours: https://gist.github.com/katylava/564416

7.8 Git Tools - Advanced Merging

Combined Diff Format

Since Git stages any merge results that are successful, when you run while in a conflicted merge state, you only get what is currently still in conflict. This can be helpful to see what you still have to resolve.

When you run directly after a merge conflict, it will give you information in a rather unique diff output format.

The format is called “Combined Diff” and gives you two columns of data next to each line. The first column shows you if that line is different (added or removed) between the “ours” branch and the file in your working directory and the second column does the same between the “theirs” branch and your working directory copy.

So in that example you can see that the and lines are in the working copy but were not in either side of the merge. This makes sense because the merge tool stuck them in there for our context, but we’re expected to remove them.

If we resolve the conflict and run again, we’ll see the same thing, but it’s a little more useful.

This shows us that “hola world” was in our side but not in the working copy, that “hello mundo” was in their side but not in the working copy and finally that “hola mundo” was not in either side but is now in the working copy. This can be useful to review before committing the resolution.

You can also get this from the for any merge to see how something was resolved after the fact. Git will output this format if you run on a merge commit, or if you add a option to a (which by default only shows patches for non-merge commits).

Sours: https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Tools-Advanced-Merging
  1. Revenue auditor salary
  2. Acrobat pro
  3. Basement trap door ideas
  4. Brown epoxy countertops
  5. Specialized p.3 review

How Can I Selectively Merge Changes Between Two Branches While Retaining Both?

I am in the midst of a major refactor of a collection of scripts, which have to remain active and functional while I perform the refactor (which will take quite a while).  I’ve split off a new branch to perform the refactor, but…

  • I’m still maintaining the master branch (correcting bugs, etc).  So, I would like to be able to periodically compare the master branch to my refactor branch, and selectively merge any fixes I’ve made to the master branch into the refactor branch to keep it as up-to-date as possible while I continue refactoring.
  • At the same time, while working on the refactor branch, I occasionally notice things or make corrections that should also be applied to the master branch.  So, I would also like to be able to periodically compare both branches and merge some of the changes in the opposite direction, from my refactor-in-progress branch to master.
  • While all of this is going on, I still need both the master branch and the refactor branch to remain separate, since the master branch should (obviously) only contain fixes or other changes I’ve confirmed function as intended.

I’m somewhat familiar with the process of merging a branch back into master once I’m finished and ready to apply all of the changes, but how can I merge changes selectively between two branches as described above?  (I’m using Visual Studio Code and a few GitHub extensions to manage my repository, in case that happens to be relevant.)

Thanks in advance for any help you can provide!

Sours: https://github.community/t/how-can-i-selectively-merge-changes-between-two-branches-while-retaining-both/3253
Combining Git commits with squash

How can I selectively merge or pick changes from another branch in Git?

To selectively merge files from one branch into another branch, run

where is the branch you want to merge from into the current branch.

The option will stage the files that have been merged by Git without actually committing them. This will give you the opportunity to modify the merged files however you want to and then commit them yourself.

Depending on how you want to merge files, there are four cases:

In this case, you accept the merged files the way Git merged them automatically and then commit them.

For example, you want to retain the version in the current branch and ignore the version in the branch you are merging from.

To select the version in the current branch, run:

This will retrieve the version of in the current branch and overwrite the automerged by Git.

Run:

This will retrieve the version of in and overwrite auto-merged by Git.

In this case, you can edit the modified directly, update it to whatever you'd want the version of to become, and then commit.

If Git cannot merge a file automatically, it will report the file as "unmerged" and produce a copy where you will need to resolve the conflicts manually.


To explain further with an example, let's say you want to merge into the current branch:

You then run the command to view the status of modified files.

For example:

Where , , and are the files git have successfully auto-merged.

What this means is that changes in the and for all those three files have been combined together without any conflicts.

You can inspect how the merge was done by running the ;

If you find some merge undesirable then you can

  1. edit the file directly
  2. save

If you don't want to merge and want to retain the version in the current branch

Run

If you don't want to merge and only want the version in

Run

If you want to be merged automatically, don't do anything.

Git has already merged it at this point.

above is a failed merge by Git. This means there are changes in both branches that occur on the same line. This is where you will need to resolve the conflicts manually. You can discard the merged done by editing the file directly or running the checkout command for the version in the branch you want to become.

Finally, don't forget to .

Sours: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/449541/how-can-i-selectively-merge-or-pick-changes-from-another-branch-in-git

Merge git selective

How can I selectively merge or pick changes from another branch in Git?

I had the exact same problem as mentioned by you above. But I found this clearer in explaining the answer.

Summary:

  • Check out the path(s) from the branch you want to merge,

  • or to selectively merge hunks

Alternatively, use reset and then add with the option ,

  • Finally commit


You use the cherry-pick command to get individual commits from one branch.

If the change(s) you want are not in individual commits, then use the method shown here to split the commit into individual commits. Roughly speaking, you use to get the original commit to edit, then to selectively revert changes, then to commit that bit as a new commit in the history.

There is another nice method here in Red Hat Magazine, where they use or possibly which allows you to add just parts of a hunk, if you want to split different changes to an individual file (search in that page for "split").

Having split the changes, you can now cherry-pick just the ones you want.


To selectively merge files from one branch into another branch, run

where is the branch you want to merge from into the current branch.

The option will stage the files that have been merged by Git without actually committing them. This will give you the opportunity to modify the merged files however you want to and then commit them yourself.

Depending on how you want to merge files, there are four cases:

1) You want a true merge.

In this case, you accept the merged files the way Git merged them automatically and then commit them.

2) There are some files you don't want to merge.

For example, you want to retain the version in the current branch and ignore the version in the branch you are merging from.

To select the version in the current branch, run:

This will retrieve the version of in the current branch and overwrite the automerged by Git.

3) If you want the version in branchX (and not a true merge).

Run:

This will retrieve the version of in and overwrite auto-merged by Git.

4) The last case is if you want to select only specific merges in .

In this case, you can edit the modified directly, update it to whatever you'd want the version of to become, and then commit.

If Git cannot merge a file automatically, it will report the file as "unmerged" and produce a copy where you will need to resolve the conflicts manually.


To explain further with an example, let's say you want to merge into the current branch:

You then run the command to view the status of modified files.

For example:

Where , , and are the files git have successfully auto-merged.

What this means is that changes in the and for all those three files have been combined together without any conflicts.

You can inspect how the merge was done by running the ;

If you find some merge undesirable then you can

  1. edit the file directly
  2. save

If you don't want to merge and want to retain the version in the current branch

Run

If you don't want to merge and only want the version in

Run

If you want to be merged automatically, don't do anything.

Git has already merged it at this point.

above is a failed merge by Git. This means there are changes in both branches that occur on the same line. This is where you will need to resolve the conflicts manually. You can discard the merged done by editing the file directly or running the checkout command for the version in the branch you want to become.

Finally, don't forget to .

Sours: https://newbedev.com/how-can-i-selectively-merge-or-pick-changes-from-another-branch-in-git
How to merge a branch into master branch in git

Problem statement

Part of your team is hard at work developing a new feature in another branch. They’ve been working on the branch for several days now, and they’ve been committing changes every hour or so. Something comes up, and you need to add some of the code from that branch back into your mainline development branch. (For this example, we’ll assume mainline development occurs in the branch.) You’re not ready to merge the entire feature branch into just yet. The code you need to grab is isolated to a handful of files, and those files don’t yet exist in the branch.

Buckets o’ fail

This seems like it should be a simple enough task, so we start rummaging through our Git toolbox looking for just the right instrument.

Idea, the first. Isn’t this exactly what is made for? Not so fast. The team has made numerous commits to the files in question. wants to merge a commit - not a file - from one branch into another branch. We don’t want to have to track down all the commits related to these files. We just want to grab these files in their current state in the feature branch and drop them into the branch. We could hunt down the last commit to each of these files and feed that information to , but that still seems like more work than ought to be necessary.

Idea, the second. How ‘bout ? Sorry. That’s not actually a thing. You’re thinking of (which won’t work for our purposes either). Nice try though.

Idea, the third. Maybe we can just merge the whole branch using , keep the files we want, and throw away the rest. Um, yeah, that would work. Eventually. But we want to be done with this task in ten seconds, not ten minutes.

Idea, the fourth. When in doubt, pull out the brute force approach? Surely we can just check out the feature branch, copy the files we need to a directory outside the repo, checkout the branch, and then paste the files back in place. Ouch! Yeah. Maybe, but I think we might have our Git license revoked if we resort to such a hack.

The simplest thing that could possibly work

As it turns out, we’re trying too hard. Our good friend is the right tool for the job.

We can simply give the name of the feature branch1 and the paths to the specific files that we want to add to our master branch.

Boom. Roasted.

Notes

Sours: https://jasonrudolph.com/blog/2009/02/25/git-tip-how-to-merge-specific-files-from-another-branch/

You will also be interested:

From behind the bathroom door. A fresh and cheerful Sparrow appeared, wrapping a towel around his hips. We ate coffee in silence, only occasionally exchanging cautious glances. I couldn't get a word out of myself. Already at the very end, the satiated boy got up from the table, stretched himself to the crunch of bones and said: - Thank you.



672 673 674 675 676