I'm curious to know if you CAN and if there is anything wrong with merging commits INTO my orphan branch. For this specific instance my Salesforce repository has a master branch and a pre-release branch but because our sandbox environment often has metadata that is not part of production yet we want to version control it but separate enough from our clean pre-release branch.
So as it is we have the following:
(Production Init Commit) (official release)
/ /
o-------------------------o [master]
\ /
o------o---------o----o [pre-release]
\ /
o-----O [feature]
\ <-- IS THIS ALLOWED/POSSIBLE/BAD IDEA?
\
o------------O [DEV] (orphan branch)
/
(Initial commit from our sandbox environment)
With git 2.9 (June 2016), merging orphan branches is still possible, but ony with the --allow-unrelated-histories
option:
git merge --allow-unrelated-histories a b
See commit e379fdf (18 Mar 2016) by Junio C Hamano (gitster
).
(Merged by Junio C Hamano -- gitster
-- in commit d04aa7e, 08 Apr 2016)
merge: refuse to create too cool a merge by default
While it makes sense to allow merging unrelated histories of two projects that started independently into one, in the way "
gitk
" was merged to "git
" itself aka "the coolest merge ever", such a merge is still an unusual event.
Worse, if somebody creates an independent history by starting from a tarball of an established project and sends a pull request to the original project, "git merge
" however happily creates such a merge without any sign of something unusual is happening.Teach "
git merge
" to refuse to create such a merge by default, unless the user passes a new "--allow-unrelated-histories
" option to tell it that the user is aware that two unrelated projects are merged.Because such a "two project merge" is a rare event, a configuration option to always allow such a merge is not added.
The git merge
doc mentions:
By default,
git merge
command refuses to merge histories that do not share a common ancestor. This option can be used to override this safety when merging histories of two projects that started their lives independently.
As that is a very rare occasion, no configuration variable to enable this by default exists and will not be added, and the list of options at the top of this documentation does not mention this option.
Alsogit pull
does not pass this option down togit merge
(instead, yougit fetch
first, examine what you will be merging and thengit merge
locally with this option).
See commit de22496 (21 Apr 2016) by Junio C Hamano (gitster
).
(Merged by Junio C Hamano -- gitster
-- in commit 175008d, 29 Apr 2016)
pull
: pass--allow-unrelated-histories
to "git merge
"Instead of:
git fetch something &&
git merge --allow-unrelated-histories FETCH_HEAD
If somebody is inclined to add such an option, updated tests in this change need to be adjusted back to:
git pull --allow-unrelated-histories something
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With