I'm not sure if there's any cost in terms of contributing either, especially when by design git can have any branch as default, and will not hinder your experience when you use something other than master.

The primary branch in git can have any name by design.

In the context of git, the word "master" is not used in the same way as "master/slave". I've never known about branches referred to as "slaves" or anything similar.

Normally, git diff looks for non-printable characters in the files and if it looks like the file is likely to be a binary file, it refuses to show the difference. The rationale for that is binary file diffs are not likely to be human readable and will probably mess up your terminal if displayed. However, you can instruct git diff to always treat files as text using the --text option. You can specify this for one diff command: git diff --text HEAD HEAD^ file.txt You can make Git always use this option by setting up a .gitattributes file that contains: file.txt diff

If you insist on using Git and insist on tracking many large files in version control, you should definitely consider LFS. (Although, if you are a heavy user of large files in version control, I would consider Plastic SCM instead, as they seem to have the most mature solution for large files handling.)

In Mercurial, use of LFS is a dynamic feature that server/repo operators can choose to enable or disable whenever they want. When the Mercurial server sends file content to a client, presence of external/LFS storage is a flag set on that file revision. Essentially, the flag says the data you are receiving is an LFS record, not the file content itself and the client knows how to resolve that record into content.

If you adopt LFS today, you are committing to a) running an LFS server forever b) incurring a history rewrite in the future in order to remove LFS from your repo, or c) ceasing to provide an LFS server and locking out people from using older Git commits.

:/<text>, e.g. :/fix nasty bug A colon, followed by a slash, followed by a text, names a commit whose commit message matches the specified regular expression.

git worktree add <path> automatically creates a new branch whose name is the final component of <path>, which is convenient if you plan to work on a new topic. For instance, git worktree add ../hotfix creates new branch hotfix and checks it out at path ../hotfix.

git diff --relative will print paths from the dir you are in.

kdiff3 can be used solely with keyboard, so 5 conflict file takes when reading the code just few minutes.

Thanks. Worked for me. I needed to move the merged directory into a sub-folder so after following the above steps I simply used git mv source-dir/ dest/new-source-dir

In case you want to put project-a into a subdirectory, you can use git-filter-repo (filter-branch is discouraged)

Note: This rewrites history;

--ignore-unmatch

Preserving history; we often find ourselves using the git blame tool to discover why a certain change was made.

Preserving commit hashes; we use commit hashes in binary names and our issue tracker; ideally, these references remain intact.

New changes to the old repositories can be imported into the monorepo and merged in. For example, in the above example, say repository one had a branch my_branch which continued to be developed after the migration. To pull those changes in:

[Old commit references] Provide a way for users to use old commit IDs with the new repository (in particular via mapping from old to new hashes with refs/replace/ references).

Let's say that we want to extract a piece of a repository, with the intent on merging just that piece into some other bigger repo.

If you want the project's history to look as though all files have always been in the directory foo/bar, then you need to do a little surgery. Use git filter-branch with the "tree filter" to rewrite the commits so that anywhere foo/bar doesn't exist, it is created and all files are moved to it:

🐛 (home, components): Resolve issue with modal collapses 🚚 (home): Move icons folder ✨ (newsletter): Add Newsletter component

feat(home, components): Add login modal fix(home, components): Resolve issue with modal collapses chore(home): Move icons folder

git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/nixos/nixpkgs

The transclusion doesn't automatically change along with it. If transclusions were direct embeds of the original content, we'd end up with link rot on a whole new scale. Every document would be a sad compilation of 404's.

master

Download for macOS

Less developer maintenance burden: The existing (Kuma) platform is complex and hard to maintain. Adding new features is very difficult. The update will vastly simplify the platform code — we estimate that we can remove a significant chunk of the existing codebase, meaning easier maintenance and contributions.

Does anyone know how to make npm use a specific fork containing a bug fix while waiting for maintainer to merge a pull request? I was just going to point my package.json to this fork, like this: "svelte-material-ui": "https://github.com/vtpatrickeddy/svelte-material-ui.git#patch-1", but that doesn't work because the repo is a monorepo. And there doesn't appear to be a way to specify a subdirectory inside it, like: "@smui/textfield": "https://github.com/vtpatrickeddy/svelte-material-ui.git/packages/textarea#patch-1",

$ git log --grep "commit message search"

$ git log -S "deleted code" -p

$ git log -S "some code" -p app/models/user.rb

$ git log -G "REGEX HERE"

Find the entire history of a snippet of code with git log -S Include -p to see the diff as well as the commit messages Include --reverse to see the commit that introduced the code listed first Scope search to specific folders or files by including a path Search with a regular expression using git log -G Search commit messages using git log --grep

If you include the -p option (short for --patch) you get the full diff alongside the commit messages

Say you want to find the first commit that introduced a particular class, method or snippet of code. You can use the pickaxe combined with the --reverse option to get the commits in reverse-chronological order so the commit where the code first appears is listed at the top

git log -S (also known as “the pickaxe”) is how you take things to the next level. It lets you search for all commits that contain a given string:

git blame is too coarse: it reports against the whole line. If the most recent change isn’t related to the part of the line you’re interested, you’re out of luck. git blame is too shallow: it only reports a single change; the most recent one. The story of the particular piece of code you’re interested in may have evolved over several commits. git blame is too narrow: it only considers the file you are running blame against. The code you are interested in may also appear in other files, but to get the relevant commits on those you’ll need to run blame several times.

I feel that with all that power that it’s gaining, instead of being a more approachable tool, that it’s actually being a tool that is continuously making people feel frustrated, to the point where I feel that whatever the next version control system is… (And it does not have to be something separate than Git. It should maybe be just a really powerful abstraction built on top of Git.) But I think whatever the next iteration of the people’s version control is… it should be something that is more reflective of how we think about what version control is for us.

master

master

For example, suppose you want to search for the string "font-size: 52 px;" in your repository: $ git rev-list –all | xargs git grep -F ‘font-size: 52 px;’

$ git show main:README.md Once you execute this command, you can view the content of the file in your terminal.

Every repository has a .git folder. It is a special hidden folder. $ ls -a . … .git

To optimize your repository further, you can use Git garbage collection. $ git gc --prune=now --aggressive This command helps when you or your team heavily uses pull or push commands.

Git, along with some Bash command piping, makes it easy to create a zip archive for your untracked files. $ git ls-files --others --exclude-standard -z |\ xargs -0 tar rvf ~/backup-untracked.zip

$ git rev-list –count master 32

Many developers count the number of commits to judge when to increment the build number, for instance, or just to get a feel for how the project is progressing.

To avoid similar scenarios, enable Git autocorrection in your Git configuration: $ git config --global help.autocorrect 1

git rev-parse --show-toplevel

When you can assume that all the materials you’re using in and with your class are open educational resources, here’s one way to remix the effective practices listed above with OER in order to provide you and your students with opportunities to spend your time and effort on work that makes the world a better place instead of wasting it on disposable assignments.

Free to accessFree to reuseFree to reviseFree to remixFree to redistributeThe question becomes, then, what is the relationship between these additional capabilities and what we know about effective teaching and learning? How can we extend, revise, and remix our pedagogy based on these additional capabilities?

git push origin master explicitly says "push the local branch 'master' to the remote named 'origin'". This does not define a persistent relationship, it just executes a push this one time. Note that the remote branch is assumed to be named "master". git push -u origin master is the same thing, except it first adds a persistent tracking relationship between your local branch "master" and the remote named "origin". As before, it is assumed the remote branch is named "master". If you have done a push with -u already, then the relationship is already defined. In the future, you can simply say git push or git pull, and git will automatically use the defined remote tracking branch without being told explicitly. You can view your tracking relationships with git branch -vv, which will list your local branches along with their current HEAD commit and, if one is set, the remote tracking branch. Here is an example.

Examining the changes to programs over time is a useful strategy for under-standing the life of the code

For a non-monorepo package you can simply point directly to the Github repo. This case is similar, but you want to scope it just to a single package within the repo. For those that make monorepos they don't necessarily need this feature. It's for those that use projects that use monorepos. Telling them to not organize their projects into monorepos doesn't help people who make use of these projects.

If npm installs a git repo, it assumes that the git repo is the package. I don't really know how we could specify a sub-path easily, since all parts of the git url are already used for other things.

This is more a rhetoric question as this seems to be quite hard ;-) There is a long discussion about installing a subfolder of a repository and monorepos in general at the NPM Github issues (yarn misses this feature, too). The thing is that this makes it quite hard to report issues of your project as one can't test the current master easily. Do you recommend a way how to use the latest Github version?

Would you really forget to push your code if that triggers a rocket launch?

Don’t forget to tell Git who you are, add this cell so you don’t have to answer every time you commit during a new session!

!git config --global user.email <YOUR EMAIL>
!git config --global user.name <YOUR NAME>

"that text has been removed from the official version on the Apache site." This itself is also not good. If you post "official" records but then quietly edit them over time, I have no choice but to assume bad faith in all the records I'm shown by you. Why should I believe anything Apache board members claim was "minuted" but which in fact it turns out they might have just edited into their records days, weeks or years later? One of the things I particularly watch for in modern news media (where no physical artefact captures whatever "mistakes" are published as once happened with newspapers) is whether when they inevitably correct a mistake they _acknowledge_ that or they instead just silently change things.

If the reality is you pushed out a release that doesn't even compile, and then you spotted the typo six minutes later, that's fine, that's what the git repo should show. Don't come to me asking if there's a way to change history so that it seems as if it didn't happen that way. How does that help anybody?

If we do not care about untracked files in the working directory, we can use the --untracked-files=no option to disregard those:

This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository.

Automate Python workflow using pre-commits: black and flake8

uses a pre-clone step to seed the project with a recent archive of the repository. This is done for several reasons: It speeds up builds because a 800 MB download only takes seconds, as opposed to a full Git clone.

echo "${BASH_REMATCH[1]/:\/\//://gitlab-ci-token:${GL_TOKEN:-$GITLAB_TOKEN}@}" > $HOME/.config/git/credentials

git config --global credential.helper store

After the initial backup, future backups are differential, both in the files that are transferred and the files that are stored on your behalf.

the files are then transferred over the to git repository onto the cloud server.

File pick up begins with an analysis of the file structure and creation of a git repository within Amazon’s Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2).

# Two commits are considered the same if they have the same tree and # the same commit and author metadata. This is how we re-identify # commits after their hash IDs have been rewritten.

git describe [--tags] describes the current branch in terms of the commits since the most recent [possibly lightweight] tag in this branch's history. Thus, the tag referenced by git describe may NOT reflect the most recently created tag overall.

What I think we're lacking is proper tooling, or at least the knowledge of it. I don't know what most people use to write Git commits, but concepts like interactive staging, rebasing, squashing, and fixup commits are very daunting with Git on the CLI, unless you know really well what you're doing. We should do a better job at learning people how to use tools like Git Tower (to give just one example) to rewrite Git history, and to produce nice Git commits.

Notebook files, however, are essentially giant JSON documents that contain the base-64 encoding of images and binary data. For a complex notebook, it would be extremely hard for anyone to read through a plaintext diff and draw meaningful conclusions—a lot of it would just be rearranged JSON and unintelligible blocks of base-64.

There is no hidden state or arbitrary execution order in a YAML file, and any changes you make to it can easily be tracked by Git

You are correct: by default, git log -p shows you the merge commit, but does not even attempt to show a diff for it.

in order to track the always-improving upstream project, we continuously rebase our patches on top of the upstream master

git commit --amend --author="John Doe <john@doe.org>"

gh repo create hello-world -d "A react app for the web" --public

gh repo create hello-world -d "A react app for the web" --public

git reflog is a very useful command in order to show a log of all the actions that have been taken! This includes merges, resets, reverts: basically any alteration to your branch.

git reflog

it pull is actually two commands in one: a git fetch, and a git merge. When we're pulling changes from the origin, we're first fetching all the data like we did with a git fetch, after which the latest changes are automatically merged into the local branch.

git pull origin master

It doesn't affect your local branch in any way: a fetch simply downloads new data.

git fetch origin master

When a certain branch contains a commit that introduced changes we need on our active branch, we can cherry-pick that command! By cherry-picking a commit, we create a new commit on our active branch that contains the changes that were introduced by the cherry-picked commit.

git cherry-pick 76d12

Another way of undoing changes is by performing a git revert. By reverting a certain commit, we create a new commit that contains the reverted changes!

git revert ec5be

Sometimes, we don't want to keep the changes that were introduced by certain commits. Unlike a soft reset, we shouldn't need to have access to them any more.

git reset --hard HEAD~2
git status

git rebase copies the commits from the current branch, and puts these copied commits on top of the specified branch.

git rebase master

This can happen when the two branches we're trying to merge have changes on the same line in the same file, or if one branch deleted a file that another branch modified, and so on.

git merge dev

git add updated_file.md
git commit -m "Merge..."

If we committed changes on the current branch that the branch we want to merge doesn't have, git will perform a no-fast-forward merge.

git merge dev

fast-forward merge can happen when the current branch has no extra commits compared to the branch we’re merging.

git merge dev

soft reset moves HEAD to the specified commit (or the index of the commit compared to HEAD), without getting rid of the changes that were introduced on the commits afterward!

git reset --soft HEAD~2
git status

git reset gets rid of all the current staged files and gives us control over where HEAD should point to.

There are 6 actions we can perform on the commits we're rebasing

git rebase -i HEAD~3

git config --global alias.s status

git config --global alias.s status

[alias]
  s = status
  d = diff
  co = checkout
  br = branch
  last = log -1 HEAD
  cane = commit --amend --no-edit
  lo = log --oneline -n 10
  pr = pull --rebase

git config --global alias.s status
git config --global alias.d diff
git config --global alias.co checkout
git config --global alias.br branch
git config --global alias.last "log -1 HEAD"
git config --global alias.cane "commit --amend --no-edit"
git config --global alias.pr "pull --rebase"
git config --global alias.lo "log --oneline -n 10"

alias g=git

alias g=git

The best commit messages I’ve seen don’t just explain what they’ve changed: they explain why

If you use practices like pair or mob programming, don't forget to add your coworkers names in your commit messages

$ git commit -m "Refactor usability tests.
>
>
Co-authored-by: name <name@example.com>
Co-authored-by: another-name <another-name@example.com>"

I'm fond of gitmoji commit convention. It lies on categorizing commits using emojies. I'm a visual person so it fits well to me but I understand this convention is not made for everyone.

:recycle: Make core independent from the git client (#171)
:whale: Upgrade Docker image version (#167)

♻️ Make core independent from the git client (#171)
🐳 Upgrade Docker image version (#167)

Separate subject from body with a blank line Limit the subject line to 50 characters Capitalize the subject line Do not end the subject line with a period Use the imperative mood in the subject line Wrap the body at 72 characters Use the body to explain what and why vs. how

Don’t commit directly to the master or development branches. Don’t hold up work by not committing local branch changes to remote branches. Never commit application secrets in public repositories. Don’t commit large files in the repository. This will increase the size of the repository. Use Git LFS for large files.  Learn more about what Git LFS is and how to utilize it in this advanced Learning Git with GitKraken tutorial. Don’t create one pull request addressing multiple issues. Don’t work on multiple issues in the same branch. If a feature is dropped, it will be difficult to revert changes. Don’t reset a branch without committing/stashing your changes. If you do so, your changes will be lost. Don’t do a force push until you’re extremely comfortable performing this action. Don’t modify or delete public history. 

Create a Git repository for every new project. Learn more about what a Git repo is in this beginner Learning Git with GitKraken tutorial. Always create a new branch for every new feature and bug. Regularly commit and push changes to the remote branch to avoid loss of work. Include a gitignore file in your project to avoid unwanted files being committed. Always commit changes with a concise and useful commit message.  Utilize git-submodule for large projects. Keep your branch up to date with development branches. Follow a workflow like Gitflow. There are many workflows available, so choose the one that best suits your needs. Always create a pull request for merging changes from one branch to another. Learn more about what a pull request is and how to create them in this intermediate Learning Git with GitKraken tutorial. Always create one pull request addressing one issue. Always review your code once by yourself before creating a pull request. Have more than one person review a pull request. It’s not necessary, but is a best practice. Enforce standards by using pull request templates and adding continuous integrations. Learn more about enhancing the pull request process with templates.  Merge changes from the release branch to master after each release. Tag the master sources after every release. Delete branches if a feature or bug fix is merged to its intended branches and the branch is no longer required. Automate general workflow checks using Git hooks. Learn more about how to trigger Git hooks in this intermediate Learning Git with GitKraken tutorial. Include read/write permission access control to repositories to prevent unauthorized access. Add protection for special branches like master and development to safeguard against accidental deletion.

To add the .gitattributes to the repo first you need to create a file called .gitattributes into the root folder for the repo.

*.js    eol=lf
*.jsx   eol=lf
*.json  eol=lf

On the Windows machine the default for the line ending is a Carriage Return Line Feed (CRLF), whereas on Linux/MacOS it's a Line Feed (LF).

{
  "endOfLine": "lf"
}

The above commands will now update the files for the repo using the newly defined line ending as specified in the .gitattributes.

git rm --cached -r .
git reset --hard

This command creates a new blob with the new content. And it updates the index entry for data/number.txt to point at the new blob.

They make the correction and add the file to the index again

git -c core.sshCommand="ssh -vvv" pull

We don’t use merge commits.

Rubydoc.info can automatically fetch and rebuild your docs from your github project everytime you commit! To add a post-receive (commit) hook to Github, simply select the official Rubydoc.info service hook from the list of service hooks in your project settings.

As GPG and Git are widely used, it relies on thoroughly tested and secure functionality.

git rebase --committer-date-is-author-date

The url also contains an optional refspec (#v0.0.1) that tells npm which branch, commit, or in this case tag you want to have checked out.

"neutrino-patch": "git+https://github.com/davidje13/neutrino-patch#semver:^1.0.1"

npm install --save git+https://github.com/davidje13/neutrino-patch#semver:^1.0.1