Git Source Code Mirror - This is a publish-only repository and all pull requests are ignored. Please follow Documentation/SubmittingPatches procedure for any of your improvements. https://git-scm.com/
You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
git/Documentation/git-branch.txt

422 lines
15 KiB

git-branch(1)
=============
NAME
----
git-branch - List, create, or delete branches
SYNOPSIS
--------
[verse]
'git branch' [--color[=<when>] | --no-color] [--show-current]
[-v [--abbrev=<n> | --no-abbrev]]
[--column[=<options>] | --no-column] [--sort=<key>]
[--merged [<commit>]] [--no-merged [<commit>]]
[--contains [<commit>]] [--no-contains [<commit>]]
[--points-at <object>] [--format=<format>]
[(-r | --remotes) | (-a | --all)]
[--list] [<pattern>...]
branch: add --recurse-submodules option for branch creation To improve the submodules UX, we would like to teach Git to handle branches in submodules. Start this process by teaching "git branch" the --recurse-submodules option so that "git branch --recurse-submodules topic" will create the `topic` branch in the superproject and its submodules. Although this commit does not introduce breaking changes, it does not work well with existing --recurse-submodules commands because "git branch --recurse-submodules" writes to the submodule ref store, but most commands only consider the superproject gitlink and ignore the submodule ref store. For example, "git checkout --recurse-submodules" will check out the commits in the superproject gitlinks (and put the submodules in detached HEAD) instead of checking out the submodule branches. Because of this, this commit introduces a new configuration value, `submodule.propagateBranches`. The plan is for Git commands to prioritize submodule ref store information over superproject gitlinks if this value is true. Because "git branch --recurse-submodules" writes to submodule ref stores, for the sake of clarity, it will not function unless this configuration value is set. This commit also includes changes that support working with submodules from a superproject commit because "branch --recurse-submodules" (and future commands) need to read .gitmodules and gitlinks from the superproject commit, but submodules are typically read from the filesystem's .gitmodules and the index's gitlinks. These changes are: * add a submodules_of_tree() helper that gives the relevant information of an in-tree submodule (e.g. path and oid) and initializes the repository * add is_tree_submodule_active() by adding a treeish_name parameter to is_submodule_active() * add the "submoduleNotUpdated" advice to advise users to update the submodules in their trees Incidentally, fix an incorrect usage string that combined the 'list' usage of git branch (-l) with the 'create' usage; this string has been incorrect since its inception, a8dfd5eac4 (Make builtin-branch.c use parse_options., 2007-10-07). Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
10 months ago
'git branch' [--track[=(direct|inherit)] | --no-track] [-f]
[--recurse-submodules] <branchname> [<start-point>]
'git branch' (--set-upstream-to=<upstream> | -u <upstream>) [<branchname>]
'git branch' --unset-upstream [<branchname>]
'git branch' (-m | -M) [<oldbranch>] <newbranch>
branch: add a --copy (-c) option to go with --move (-m) Add the ability to --copy a branch and its reflog and configuration, this uses the same underlying machinery as the --move (-m) option except the reflog and configuration is copied instead of being moved. This is useful for e.g. copying a topic branch to a new version, e.g. work to work-2 after submitting the work topic to the list, while preserving all the tracking info and other configuration that goes with the branch, and unlike --move keeping the other already-submitted branch around for reference. Like --move, when the source branch is the currently checked out branch the HEAD is moved to the destination branch. In the case of --move we don't really have a choice (other than remaining on a detached HEAD) and in order to keep the functionality consistent, we are doing it in similar way for --copy too. The most common usage of this feature is expected to be moving to a new topic branch which is a copy of the current one, in that case moving to the target branch is what the user wants, and doesn't unexpectedly behave differently than --move would. One outstanding caveat of this implementation is that: git checkout maint && git checkout master && git branch -c topic && git checkout - Will check out 'maint' instead of 'master'. This is because the @{-N} feature (or its -1 shorthand "-") relies on HEAD reflogs created by the checkout command, so in this case we'll checkout maint instead of master, as the user might expect. What to do about that is left to a future change. Helped-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Sahil Dua <sahildua2305@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
6 years ago
'git branch' (-c | -C) [<oldbranch>] <newbranch>
'git branch' (-d | -D) [-r] <branchname>...
'git branch' --edit-description [<branchname>]
DESCRIPTION
-----------
If `--list` is given, or if there are no non-option arguments, existing
branches are listed; the current branch will be highlighted in green and
marked with an asterisk. Any branches checked out in linked worktrees will
be highlighted in cyan and marked with a plus sign. Option `-r` causes the
remote-tracking branches to be listed,
and option `-a` shows both local and remote branches.
If a `<pattern>`
is given, it is used as a shell wildcard to restrict the output to
matching branches. If multiple patterns are given, a branch is shown if
it matches any of the patterns.
Note that when providing a
`<pattern>`, you must use `--list`; otherwise the command may be interpreted
as branch creation.
With `--contains`, shows only the branches that contain the named commit
(in other words, the branches whose tip commits are descendants of the
named commit), `--no-contains` inverts it. With `--merged`, only branches
merged into the named commit (i.e. the branches whose tip commits are
reachable from the named commit) will be listed. With `--no-merged` only
branches not merged into the named commit will be listed. If the <commit>
argument is missing it defaults to `HEAD` (i.e. the tip of the current
branch).
The command's second form creates a new branch head named <branchname>
which points to the current `HEAD`, or <start-point> if given. As a
special case, for <start-point>, you may use `"A...B"` as a shortcut for
the merge base of `A` and `B` if there is exactly one merge base. You
can leave out at most one of `A` and `B`, in which case it defaults to
`HEAD`.
Note that this will create the new branch, but it will not switch the
working tree to it; use "git switch <newbranch>" to switch to the
new branch.
When a local branch is started off a remote-tracking branch, Git sets up the
branch (specifically the `branch.<name>.remote` and `branch.<name>.merge`
configuration entries) so that 'git pull' will appropriately merge from
the remote-tracking branch. This behavior may be changed via the global
`branch.autoSetupMerge` configuration flag. That setting can be
overridden by using the `--track` and `--no-track` options, and
changed later using `git branch --set-upstream-to`.
With a `-m` or `-M` option, <oldbranch> will be renamed to <newbranch>.
If <oldbranch> had a corresponding reflog, it is renamed to match
<newbranch>, and a reflog entry is created to remember the branch
renaming. If <newbranch> exists, -M must be used to force the rename
to happen.
branch: add a --copy (-c) option to go with --move (-m) Add the ability to --copy a branch and its reflog and configuration, this uses the same underlying machinery as the --move (-m) option except the reflog and configuration is copied instead of being moved. This is useful for e.g. copying a topic branch to a new version, e.g. work to work-2 after submitting the work topic to the list, while preserving all the tracking info and other configuration that goes with the branch, and unlike --move keeping the other already-submitted branch around for reference. Like --move, when the source branch is the currently checked out branch the HEAD is moved to the destination branch. In the case of --move we don't really have a choice (other than remaining on a detached HEAD) and in order to keep the functionality consistent, we are doing it in similar way for --copy too. The most common usage of this feature is expected to be moving to a new topic branch which is a copy of the current one, in that case moving to the target branch is what the user wants, and doesn't unexpectedly behave differently than --move would. One outstanding caveat of this implementation is that: git checkout maint && git checkout master && git branch -c topic && git checkout - Will check out 'maint' instead of 'master'. This is because the @{-N} feature (or its -1 shorthand "-") relies on HEAD reflogs created by the checkout command, so in this case we'll checkout maint instead of master, as the user might expect. What to do about that is left to a future change. Helped-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Sahil Dua <sahildua2305@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
6 years ago
The `-c` and `-C` options have the exact same semantics as `-m` and
`-M`, except instead of the branch being renamed, it will be copied to a
new name, along with its config and reflog.
branch: add a --copy (-c) option to go with --move (-m) Add the ability to --copy a branch and its reflog and configuration, this uses the same underlying machinery as the --move (-m) option except the reflog and configuration is copied instead of being moved. This is useful for e.g. copying a topic branch to a new version, e.g. work to work-2 after submitting the work topic to the list, while preserving all the tracking info and other configuration that goes with the branch, and unlike --move keeping the other already-submitted branch around for reference. Like --move, when the source branch is the currently checked out branch the HEAD is moved to the destination branch. In the case of --move we don't really have a choice (other than remaining on a detached HEAD) and in order to keep the functionality consistent, we are doing it in similar way for --copy too. The most common usage of this feature is expected to be moving to a new topic branch which is a copy of the current one, in that case moving to the target branch is what the user wants, and doesn't unexpectedly behave differently than --move would. One outstanding caveat of this implementation is that: git checkout maint && git checkout master && git branch -c topic && git checkout - Will check out 'maint' instead of 'master'. This is because the @{-N} feature (or its -1 shorthand "-") relies on HEAD reflogs created by the checkout command, so in this case we'll checkout maint instead of master, as the user might expect. What to do about that is left to a future change. Helped-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Sahil Dua <sahildua2305@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
6 years ago
With a `-d` or `-D` option, `<branchname>` will be deleted. You may
specify more than one branch for deletion. If the branch currently
has a reflog then the reflog will also be deleted.
Use `-r` together with `-d` to delete remote-tracking branches. Note, that it
only makes sense to delete remote-tracking branches if they no longer exist
in the remote repository or if 'git fetch' was configured not to fetch
them again. See also the 'prune' subcommand of linkgit:git-remote[1] for a
way to clean up all obsolete remote-tracking branches.
OPTIONS
-------
-d::
--delete::
Delete a branch. The branch must be fully merged in its
upstream branch, or in `HEAD` if no upstream was set with
`--track` or `--set-upstream-to`.
-D::
Shortcut for `--delete --force`.
--create-reflog::
Create the branch's reflog. This activates recording of
all changes made to the branch ref, enabling use of date
based sha1 expressions such as "<branchname>@\{yesterday}".
Note that in non-bare repositories, reflogs are usually
enabled by default by the `core.logAllRefUpdates` config option.
The negated form `--no-create-reflog` only overrides an earlier
`--create-reflog`, but currently does not negate the setting of
`core.logAllRefUpdates`.
-f::
--force::
Reset <branchname> to <startpoint>, even if <branchname> exists
already. Without `-f`, 'git branch' refuses to change an existing branch.
In combination with `-d` (or `--delete`), allow deleting the
branch irrespective of its merged status, or whether it even
points to a valid commit. In combination with
`-m` (or `--move`), allow renaming the branch even if the new
branch: add a --copy (-c) option to go with --move (-m) Add the ability to --copy a branch and its reflog and configuration, this uses the same underlying machinery as the --move (-m) option except the reflog and configuration is copied instead of being moved. This is useful for e.g. copying a topic branch to a new version, e.g. work to work-2 after submitting the work topic to the list, while preserving all the tracking info and other configuration that goes with the branch, and unlike --move keeping the other already-submitted branch around for reference. Like --move, when the source branch is the currently checked out branch the HEAD is moved to the destination branch. In the case of --move we don't really have a choice (other than remaining on a detached HEAD) and in order to keep the functionality consistent, we are doing it in similar way for --copy too. The most common usage of this feature is expected to be moving to a new topic branch which is a copy of the current one, in that case moving to the target branch is what the user wants, and doesn't unexpectedly behave differently than --move would. One outstanding caveat of this implementation is that: git checkout maint && git checkout master && git branch -c topic && git checkout - Will check out 'maint' instead of 'master'. This is because the @{-N} feature (or its -1 shorthand "-") relies on HEAD reflogs created by the checkout command, so in this case we'll checkout maint instead of master, as the user might expect. What to do about that is left to a future change. Helped-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Sahil Dua <sahildua2305@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
6 years ago
branch name already exists, the same applies for `-c` (or `--copy`).
-m::
--move::
Move/rename a branch, together with its config and reflog.
-M::
Shortcut for `--move --force`.
branch: add a --copy (-c) option to go with --move (-m) Add the ability to --copy a branch and its reflog and configuration, this uses the same underlying machinery as the --move (-m) option except the reflog and configuration is copied instead of being moved. This is useful for e.g. copying a topic branch to a new version, e.g. work to work-2 after submitting the work topic to the list, while preserving all the tracking info and other configuration that goes with the branch, and unlike --move keeping the other already-submitted branch around for reference. Like --move, when the source branch is the currently checked out branch the HEAD is moved to the destination branch. In the case of --move we don't really have a choice (other than remaining on a detached HEAD) and in order to keep the functionality consistent, we are doing it in similar way for --copy too. The most common usage of this feature is expected to be moving to a new topic branch which is a copy of the current one, in that case moving to the target branch is what the user wants, and doesn't unexpectedly behave differently than --move would. One outstanding caveat of this implementation is that: git checkout maint && git checkout master && git branch -c topic && git checkout - Will check out 'maint' instead of 'master'. This is because the @{-N} feature (or its -1 shorthand "-") relies on HEAD reflogs created by the checkout command, so in this case we'll checkout maint instead of master, as the user might expect. What to do about that is left to a future change. Helped-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Sahil Dua <sahildua2305@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
6 years ago
-c::
--copy::
Copy a branch, together with its config and reflog.
branch: add a --copy (-c) option to go with --move (-m) Add the ability to --copy a branch and its reflog and configuration, this uses the same underlying machinery as the --move (-m) option except the reflog and configuration is copied instead of being moved. This is useful for e.g. copying a topic branch to a new version, e.g. work to work-2 after submitting the work topic to the list, while preserving all the tracking info and other configuration that goes with the branch, and unlike --move keeping the other already-submitted branch around for reference. Like --move, when the source branch is the currently checked out branch the HEAD is moved to the destination branch. In the case of --move we don't really have a choice (other than remaining on a detached HEAD) and in order to keep the functionality consistent, we are doing it in similar way for --copy too. The most common usage of this feature is expected to be moving to a new topic branch which is a copy of the current one, in that case moving to the target branch is what the user wants, and doesn't unexpectedly behave differently than --move would. One outstanding caveat of this implementation is that: git checkout maint && git checkout master && git branch -c topic && git checkout - Will check out 'maint' instead of 'master'. This is because the @{-N} feature (or its -1 shorthand "-") relies on HEAD reflogs created by the checkout command, so in this case we'll checkout maint instead of master, as the user might expect. What to do about that is left to a future change. Helped-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Sahil Dua <sahildua2305@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
6 years ago
-C::
Shortcut for `--copy --force`.
--color[=<when>]::
Color branches to highlight current, local, and
remote-tracking branches.
The value must be always (the default), never, or auto.
--no-color::
Turn off branch colors, even when the configuration file gives the
default to color output.
Same as `--color=never`.
-i::
--ignore-case::
Sorting and filtering branches are case insensitive.
--column[=<options>]::
--no-column::
Display branch listing in columns. See configuration variable
`column.branch` for option syntax. `--column` and `--no-column`
without options are equivalent to 'always' and 'never' respectively.
+
This option is only applicable in non-verbose mode.
-r::
--remotes::
List or delete (if used with -d) the remote-tracking branches.
Combine with `--list` to match the optional pattern(s).
-a::
--all::
List both remote-tracking branches and local branches.
Combine with `--list` to match optional pattern(s).
-l::
--list::
List branches. With optional `<pattern>...`, e.g. `git
branch --list 'maint-*'`, list only the branches that match
the pattern(s).
--show-current::
Print the name of the current branch. In detached HEAD state,
nothing is printed.
-v::
-vv::
--verbose::
When in list mode,
show sha1 and commit subject line for each head, along with
relationship to upstream branch (if any). If given twice, print
the path of the linked worktree (if any) and the name of the upstream
branch, as well (see also `git remote show <remote>`). Note that the
current worktree's HEAD will not have its path printed (it will always
be your current directory).
-q::
--quiet::
Be more quiet when creating or deleting a branch, suppressing
non-error messages.
--abbrev=<n>::
In the verbose listing that show the commit object name,
show the shortest prefix that is at least '<n>' hexdigits
long that uniquely refers the object.
The default value is 7 and can be overridden by the `core.abbrev`
config option.
--no-abbrev::
Display the full sha1s in the output listing rather than abbreviating them.
-t::
--track[=(direct|inherit)]::
When creating a new branch, set up `branch.<name>.remote` and
`branch.<name>.merge` configuration entries to set "upstream" tracking
configuration for the new branch. This
configuration will tell git to show the relationship between the
two branches in `git status` and `git branch -v`. Furthermore,
it directs `git pull` without arguments to pull from the
upstream when the new branch is checked out.
+
The exact upstream branch is chosen depending on the optional argument:
`-t`, `--track`, or `--track=direct` means to use the start-point branch
itself as the upstream; `--track=inherit` means to copy the upstream
configuration of the start-point branch.
+
branch: new autosetupmerge option 'simple' for matching branches With the default push.default option, "simple", beginners are protected from accidentally pushing to the "wrong" branch in centralized workflows: if the remote tracking branch they would push to does not have the same name as the local branch, and they try to do a "default push", they get an error and explanation with options. There is a particular centralized workflow where this often happens: a user branches to a new local topic branch from an existing remote branch, eg with "checkout -b feature1 origin/master". With the default branch.autosetupmerge configuration (value "true"), git will automatically add origin/master as the upstream tracking branch. When the user pushes with a default "git push", with the intention of pushing their (new) topic branch to the remote, they get an error, and (amongst other things) a suggestion to run "git push origin HEAD". If they follow this suggestion the push succeeds, but on subsequent default pushes they continue to get an error - so eventually they figure out to add "-u" to change the tracking branch, or they spelunk the push.default config doc as proposed and set it to "current", or some GUI tooling does one or the other of these things for them. When one of their coworkers later works on the same topic branch, they don't get any of that "weirdness". They just "git checkout feature1" and everything works exactly as they expect, with the shared remote branch set up as remote tracking branch, and push and pull working out of the box. The "stable state" for this way of working is that local branches have the same-name remote tracking branch (origin/feature1 in this example), and multiple people can work on that remote feature branch at the same time, trusting "git pull" to merge or rebase as required for them to be able to push their interim changes to that same feature branch on that same remote. (merging from the upstream "master" branch, and merging back to it, are separate more involved processes in this flow). There is a problem in this flow/way of working, however, which is that the first user, when they first branched from origin/master, ended up with the "wrong" remote tracking branch (different from the stable state). For a while, before they pushed (and maybe longer, if they don't use -u/--set-upstream), their "git pull" wasn't getting other users' changes to the feature branch - it was getting any changes from the remote "master" branch instead (a completely different class of changes!) An experienced git user might say "well yeah, that's what it means to have the remote tracking branch set to origin/master!" - but the original user above didn't *ask* to have the remote master branch added as remote tracking branch - that just happened automatically when they branched their feature branch. They didn't necessarily even notice or understand the meaning of the "set up to track 'origin/master'" message when they created the branch - especially if they are using a GUI. Looking at how to fix this, you might think "OK, so disable auto setup of remote tracking - set branch.autosetupmerge to false" - but that will inconvenience the *second* user in this story - the one who just wanted to start working on the topic branch. The first and second users swap roles at different points in time of course - they should both have a sane configuration that does the right thing in both situations. Make this "branches have the same name locally as on the remote" workflow less painful / more obvious by introducing a new branch.autosetupmerge option called "simple", to match the same-name "push.default" option that makes similar assumptions. This new option automatically sets up tracking in a *subset* of the current default situations: when the original ref is a remote tracking branch *and* has the same branch name on the remote (as the new local branch name). Update the error displayed when the 'push.default=simple' configuration rejects a mismatching-upstream-name default push, to offer this new branch.autosetupmerge option that will prevent this class of error. With this new configuration, in the example situation above, the first user does *not* get origin/master set up as the tracking branch for the new local branch. If they "git pull" in their new local-only branch, they get an error explaining there is no upstream branch - which makes sense and is helpful. If they "git push", they get an error explaining how to push *and* suggesting they specify --set-upstream - which is exactly the right thing to do for them. This new option is likely not appropriate for users intentionally implementing a "triangular workflow" with a shared upstream tracking branch, that they "git pull" in and a "private" feature branch that they push/force-push to just for remote safe-keeping until they are ready to push up to the shared branch explicitly/separately. Such users are likely to prefer keeping the current default merge.autosetupmerge=true behavior, and change their push.default to "current". Also extend the existing branch tests with three new cases testing this option - the obvious matching-name and non-matching-name cases, and also a non-matching-ref-type case. The matching-name case needs to temporarily create an independent repo to fetch from, as the general strategy of using the local repo as the remote in these tests precludes locally branching with the same name as in the "remote". Signed-off-by: Tao Klerks <tao@klerks.biz> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
7 months ago
The branch.autoSetupMerge configuration variable specifies how `git switch`,
`git checkout` and `git branch` should behave when neither `--track` nor
`--no-track` are specified:
+
The default option, `true`, behaves as though `--track=direct`
were given whenever the start-point is a remote-tracking branch.
`false` behaves as if `--no-track` were given. `always` behaves as though
`--track=direct` were given. `inherit` behaves as though `--track=inherit`
were given. `simple` behaves as though `--track=direct` were given only when
the start-point is a remote-tracking branch and the new branch has the same
name as the remote branch.
+
See linkgit:git-pull[1] and linkgit:git-config[1] for additional discussion on
how the `branch.<name>.remote` and `branch.<name>.merge` options are used.
--no-track::
Do not set up "upstream" configuration, even if the
branch.autoSetupMerge configuration variable is set.
branch: add --recurse-submodules option for branch creation To improve the submodules UX, we would like to teach Git to handle branches in submodules. Start this process by teaching "git branch" the --recurse-submodules option so that "git branch --recurse-submodules topic" will create the `topic` branch in the superproject and its submodules. Although this commit does not introduce breaking changes, it does not work well with existing --recurse-submodules commands because "git branch --recurse-submodules" writes to the submodule ref store, but most commands only consider the superproject gitlink and ignore the submodule ref store. For example, "git checkout --recurse-submodules" will check out the commits in the superproject gitlinks (and put the submodules in detached HEAD) instead of checking out the submodule branches. Because of this, this commit introduces a new configuration value, `submodule.propagateBranches`. The plan is for Git commands to prioritize submodule ref store information over superproject gitlinks if this value is true. Because "git branch --recurse-submodules" writes to submodule ref stores, for the sake of clarity, it will not function unless this configuration value is set. This commit also includes changes that support working with submodules from a superproject commit because "branch --recurse-submodules" (and future commands) need to read .gitmodules and gitlinks from the superproject commit, but submodules are typically read from the filesystem's .gitmodules and the index's gitlinks. These changes are: * add a submodules_of_tree() helper that gives the relevant information of an in-tree submodule (e.g. path and oid) and initializes the repository * add is_tree_submodule_active() by adding a treeish_name parameter to is_submodule_active() * add the "submoduleNotUpdated" advice to advise users to update the submodules in their trees Incidentally, fix an incorrect usage string that combined the 'list' usage of git branch (-l) with the 'create' usage; this string has been incorrect since its inception, a8dfd5eac4 (Make builtin-branch.c use parse_options., 2007-10-07). Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Glen Choo <chooglen@google.com> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
10 months ago
--recurse-submodules::
THIS OPTION IS EXPERIMENTAL! Causes the current command to
recurse into submodules if `submodule.propagateBranches` is
enabled. See `submodule.propagateBranches` in
linkgit:git-config[1]. Currently, only branch creation is
supported.
+
When used in branch creation, a new branch <branchname> will be created
in the superproject and all of the submodules in the superproject's
<start-point>. In submodules, the branch will point to the submodule
commit in the superproject's <start-point> but the branch's tracking
information will be set up based on the submodule's branches and remotes
e.g. `git branch --recurse-submodules topic origin/main` will create the
submodule branch "topic" that points to the submodule commit in the
superproject's "origin/main", but tracks the submodule's "origin/main".
--set-upstream::
As this option had confusing syntax, it is no longer supported.
Please use `--track` or `--set-upstream-to` instead.
-u <upstream>::
--set-upstream-to=<upstream>::
Set up <branchname>'s tracking information so <upstream> is
considered <branchname>'s upstream branch. If no <branchname>
is specified, then it defaults to the current branch.
--unset-upstream::
Remove the upstream information for <branchname>. If no branch
is specified it defaults to the current branch.
--edit-description::
Open an editor and edit the text to explain what the branch is
for, to be used by various other commands (e.g. `format-patch`,
`request-pull`, and `merge` (if enabled)). Multi-line explanations
may be used.
--contains [<commit>]::
Only list branches which contain the specified commit (HEAD
if not specified). Implies `--list`.
ref-filter: add --no-contains option to tag/branch/for-each-ref Change the tag, branch & for-each-ref commands to have a --no-contains option in addition to their longstanding --contains options. This allows for finding the last-good rollout tag given a known-bad <commit>. Given a hypothetically bad commit cf5c7253e0, the git version to revert to can be found with this hacky two-liner: (git tag -l 'v[0-9]*'; git tag -l --contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*') | sort | uniq -c | grep -E '^ *1 ' | awk '{print $2}' | tail -n 10 With this new --no-contains option the same can be achieved with: git tag -l --no-contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*' | sort | tail -n 10 As the filtering machinery is shared between the tag, branch & for-each-ref commands, implement this for those commands too. A practical use for this with "branch" is e.g. finding branches which were branched off between v2.8.0 and v2.10.0: git branch --contains v2.8.0 --no-contains v2.10.0 The "describe" command also has a --contains option, but its semantics are unrelated to what tag/branch/for-each-ref use --contains for. A --no-contains option for "describe" wouldn't make any sense, other than being exactly equivalent to not supplying --contains at all, which would be confusing at best. Add a --without option to "tag" as an alias for --no-contains, for consistency with --with and --contains. The --with option is undocumented, and possibly the only user of it is Junio (<xmqqefy71iej.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>). But it's trivial to support, so let's do that. The additions to the the test suite are inverse copies of the corresponding --contains tests. With this change --no-contains for tag, branch & for-each-ref is just as well tested as the existing --contains option. In addition to those tests, add a test for "tag" which asserts that --no-contains won't find tree/blob tags, which is slightly unintuitive, but consistent with how --contains works & is documented. Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
6 years ago
--no-contains [<commit>]::
Only list branches which don't contain the specified commit
(HEAD if not specified). Implies `--list`.
--merged [<commit>]::
Only list branches whose tips are reachable from the
specified commit (HEAD if not specified). Implies `--list`.
--no-merged [<commit>]::
Only list branches whose tips are not reachable from the
specified commit (HEAD if not specified). Implies `--list`.
<branchname>::
The name of the branch to create or delete.
The new branch name must pass all checks defined by
linkgit:git-check-ref-format[1]. Some of these checks
may restrict the characters allowed in a branch name.
<start-point>::
The new branch head will point to this commit. It may be
given as a branch name, a commit-id, or a tag. If this
option is omitted, the current HEAD will be used instead.
<oldbranch>::
The name of an existing branch to rename.
<newbranch>::
The new name for an existing branch. The same restrictions as for
<branchname> apply.
--sort=<key>::
Sort based on the key given. Prefix `-` to sort in descending
order of the value. You may use the --sort=<key> option
multiple times, in which case the last key becomes the primary
key. The keys supported are the same as those in `git
for-each-ref`. Sort order defaults to the value configured for the
`branch.sort` variable if exists, or to sorting based on the
full refname (including `refs/...` prefix). This lists
detached HEAD (if present) first, then local branches and
finally remote-tracking branches. See linkgit:git-config[1].
--points-at <object>::
Only list branches of the given object.
--format <format>::
A string that interpolates `%(fieldname)` from a branch ref being shown
and the object it points at. The format is the same as
that of linkgit:git-for-each-ref[1].
CONFIGURATION
-------------
`pager.branch` is only respected when listing branches, i.e., when
`--list` is used or implied. The default is to use a pager.
See linkgit:git-config[1].
include::includes/cmd-config-section-rest.txt[]
include::config/branch.txt[]
EXAMPLES
--------
Start development from a known tag::
+
------------
$ git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/.../linux-2.6 my2.6
$ cd my2.6
$ git branch my2.6.14 v2.6.14 <1>
$ git switch my2.6.14
------------
+
<1> This step and the next one could be combined into a single step with
"checkout -b my2.6.14 v2.6.14".
Delete an unneeded branch::
+
------------
$ git clone git://git.kernel.org/.../git.git my.git
$ cd my.git
$ git branch -d -r origin/todo origin/html origin/man <1>
$ git branch -D test <2>
------------
+
<1> Delete the remote-tracking branches "todo", "html" and "man". The next
'fetch' or 'pull' will create them again unless you configure them not to.
See linkgit:git-fetch[1].
<2> Delete the "test" branch even if the "master" branch (or whichever branch
is currently checked out) does not have all commits from the test branch.
Listing branches from a specific remote::
+
------------
$ git branch -r -l '<remote>/<pattern>' <1>
$ git for-each-ref 'refs/remotes/<remote>/<pattern>' <2>
------------
+
<1> Using `-a` would conflate <remote> with any local branches you happen to
have been prefixed with the same <remote> pattern.
<2> `for-each-ref` can take a wide range of options. See linkgit:git-for-each-ref[1]
Patterns will normally need quoting.
NOTES
-----
If you are creating a branch that you want to switch to immediately,
it is easier to use the "git switch" command with its `-c` option to
do the same thing with a single command.
ref-filter: add --no-contains option to tag/branch/for-each-ref Change the tag, branch & for-each-ref commands to have a --no-contains option in addition to their longstanding --contains options. This allows for finding the last-good rollout tag given a known-bad <commit>. Given a hypothetically bad commit cf5c7253e0, the git version to revert to can be found with this hacky two-liner: (git tag -l 'v[0-9]*'; git tag -l --contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*') | sort | uniq -c | grep -E '^ *1 ' | awk '{print $2}' | tail -n 10 With this new --no-contains option the same can be achieved with: git tag -l --no-contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*' | sort | tail -n 10 As the filtering machinery is shared between the tag, branch & for-each-ref commands, implement this for those commands too. A practical use for this with "branch" is e.g. finding branches which were branched off between v2.8.0 and v2.10.0: git branch --contains v2.8.0 --no-contains v2.10.0 The "describe" command also has a --contains option, but its semantics are unrelated to what tag/branch/for-each-ref use --contains for. A --no-contains option for "describe" wouldn't make any sense, other than being exactly equivalent to not supplying --contains at all, which would be confusing at best. Add a --without option to "tag" as an alias for --no-contains, for consistency with --with and --contains. The --with option is undocumented, and possibly the only user of it is Junio (<xmqqefy71iej.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>). But it's trivial to support, so let's do that. The additions to the the test suite are inverse copies of the corresponding --contains tests. With this change --no-contains for tag, branch & for-each-ref is just as well tested as the existing --contains option. In addition to those tests, add a test for "tag" which asserts that --no-contains won't find tree/blob tags, which is slightly unintuitive, but consistent with how --contains works & is documented. Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
6 years ago
The options `--contains`, `--no-contains`, `--merged` and `--no-merged`
serve four related but different purposes:
- `--contains <commit>` is used to find all branches which will need
special attention if <commit> were to be rebased or amended, since those
branches contain the specified <commit>.
ref-filter: add --no-contains option to tag/branch/for-each-ref Change the tag, branch & for-each-ref commands to have a --no-contains option in addition to their longstanding --contains options. This allows for finding the last-good rollout tag given a known-bad <commit>. Given a hypothetically bad commit cf5c7253e0, the git version to revert to can be found with this hacky two-liner: (git tag -l 'v[0-9]*'; git tag -l --contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*') | sort | uniq -c | grep -E '^ *1 ' | awk '{print $2}' | tail -n 10 With this new --no-contains option the same can be achieved with: git tag -l --no-contains cf5c7253e0 'v[0-9]*' | sort | tail -n 10 As the filtering machinery is shared between the tag, branch & for-each-ref commands, implement this for those commands too. A practical use for this with "branch" is e.g. finding branches which were branched off between v2.8.0 and v2.10.0: git branch --contains v2.8.0 --no-contains v2.10.0 The "describe" command also has a --contains option, but its semantics are unrelated to what tag/branch/for-each-ref use --contains for. A --no-contains option for "describe" wouldn't make any sense, other than being exactly equivalent to not supplying --contains at all, which would be confusing at best. Add a --without option to "tag" as an alias for --no-contains, for consistency with --with and --contains. The --with option is undocumented, and possibly the only user of it is Junio (<xmqqefy71iej.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>). But it's trivial to support, so let's do that. The additions to the the test suite are inverse copies of the corresponding --contains tests. With this change --no-contains for tag, branch & for-each-ref is just as well tested as the existing --contains option. In addition to those tests, add a test for "tag" which asserts that --no-contains won't find tree/blob tags, which is slightly unintuitive, but consistent with how --contains works & is documented. Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
6 years ago
- `--no-contains <commit>` is the inverse of that, i.e. branches that don't
contain the specified <commit>.
- `--merged` is used to find all branches which can be safely deleted,
since those branches are fully contained by HEAD.
- `--no-merged` is used to find branches which are candidates for merging
into HEAD, since those branches are not fully contained by HEAD.
include::ref-reachability-filters.txt[]
SEE ALSO
--------
linkgit:git-check-ref-format[1],
linkgit:git-fetch[1],
linkgit:git-remote[1],
link:user-manual.html#what-is-a-branch[``Understanding history: What is
a branch?''] in the Git User's Manual.
GIT
---
Part of the linkgit:git[1] suite