I have a feature branch, and a master branch.
Master branch has evolved and I mean to have those updates to diverging as little as possible from master branch.
So I git pull
in both branches, git checkout feature/branch
and finally git rebase master
.
Now here I either expect everything to work smoothly or conflicts showing up that I need to resolve before continuing rebase until all master commits are re-applied successfully on feature branch.
Now what really happened in my case is something I do not understand:
$>git rebase master
First, rewinding head to replay your work on top of it...
Applying: myFirstCommitDoneOnTheBranch
Applying: myOtherCommitDoneOnTheBranch
$>git status
On branch feature/branch
Your branch and 'origin/feature/feature' have diverged,
and have 27 and 2 different commits each, respectively.
(use "git pull" to merge the remote branch into yours)
nothing to commit, working tree clean
$>git pull
*load of conflicts*
Now, as much as I can understand he load of conflicts after the pull; I do not understand the need for a pull. Logically, it should rollback to master when it got branched, save the commits made on the branch, forward to latest commit on master and then apply the saved commits.
I do not understand to what the Applying
message refers to: what is applying the commits on which version?
tl;dr You should update both master
and feature
with git pull
and git pull --rebase
before rebasing feature
on top of master
. There is no need to do a git pull
after you have rebased your feature
branch on top of master
.
With your current workflow, the reason why git status
is telling you this:
Your branch and 'origin/feature' have diverged, and have 27 and 2 different commits each, respectively.
is because your rebased feature
branch now has 25 new commits that aren't reachable from origin/feature
(since they came from the rebase on master
) plus 2 commits that are reachable from origin/feature
but have different commit IDs. Those commits contain the same changes (i.e. they're patch equivalent) but they have different SHA-1 hashes because they are based off of a different commit in origin/feature
than the one you rebased them on in your local repository.
Here's an example. Let's assume that this is your history before doing git pull
on master
:
A - B - C (master)
\
D - E (feature)
After git pull
, master
got commit F
:
A - B - C - F (master, origin/master)
\
D - E (feature)
At that point, you rebase feature
on top of master
, which applies D
and E
:
A - B - C - F (master, origin/master)
\
D - E (feature)
In the meantime, the remote branch origin/feature
is still based off commit C
:
A - B - C - F (master, origin/master)
\ \
\ D' - E' (feature)
\
D - E (origin/feature)
If you do a git status
on feature
, Git will tell you that your feature
branch has diverged from origin/feature
with 3 (F
, D'
, E'
) and 2 (D
, E
) commits, respectively.
Note that
D'
andE'
contain the same changes asD
andE
but have different commit IDs because they have been rebased on top ofF
.
The solution is to do git pull
on both master
and feature
before rebasing feature
on master
. However, since you may have commits on feature
that you haven't yet pushed to origin
, you would want to do:
git checkout feature && git pull --rebase
to avoid creating a merge commit between origin/feature
and your local feature
.
In light of this comment, I expanded on the diverging branches. The reason why git status
reports that feature
and origin/feature
diverge after the rebase is due to the fact that rebasing brings in new commits to feature
, plus it rewrites the commits that were previously pushed to origin/feature
.
Consider the situation after the pull but before the rebase:
A - B - C - F (master)
\
D - E (feature, origin/feature)
At this point, feature
and origin/feature
point to the same commit E
—in other words, they're in "sync". After rebasing feature
on top of master
, history will look like this:
A - B - C - F (master)
\ \
\ D' - E' (feature)
\
D - E (origin/feature)
As you can see, feature
and origin/feature
have diverged, their common ancestor being commit C
. This is because feature
now contains the new commit F
from master
plus D'
and E'
(read as "D prime" and "E prime") which are commits D
and E
applied on top of F
. Even though they contain the same changes, Git considers them to be different because they have different commit IDs. Meanwhile, origin/feature
still references D
and E
.
At this point, you've rewritten history: you've modified existing commits by virtue of rebasing them, effectively creating "new" ones.
Now, if you were to run git pull
on feature
this is what would happen:
A - B - C - F (master)
\ \
\ D' - E'- M (feature)
\ /
D - E - (origin/feature)
Since git pull
does git fetch
+ git merge
, this would result in the creation of the merge commit M
, whose parents are E'
and E
.
If, instead, you ran git pull --rebase
(that is, git fetch
+ git rebase
) then Git would:
feature
to commit C
(the common ancestor of feature
and origin/feature
)D
and E
from origin/feature
F
, D'
and E'
However, noticing that D'
and E'
contain the same changes as D
and E
, Git would just discard them, resulting in a history looking like this:
A - B - C - F (master)
\
D - E - F' (feature)
^
(origin/feature)
Notice how commit F
, previously reachable from feature
, got applied on top of origin/feature
resulting in F'
. At this point, git status
would tell you this:
Your branch is ahead of 'origin/feature' by 1 commit.
That commit being, of course, F'
.