Menu
I had two branches: master and branch1. I just merged branch1 back into master and I'm done with that branch. Should I delete it or just let it sit around? Will deleting it cause any loss of data?
579
When you're done with a branch and it has been merged into master, delete it. A new branch can be made off of the most recent commit on the master branch. Also, while it is ok to hang onto branches after you've merged them into the master they will begin to pile up.
The only reason you might have for not deleting a branch post-merge is so you know where a given feature ended, but merge commits (and git merge --no-ff if you really want) make that irrelevant.
Your history will always be preserved. So basically the only reason to keep hotfix branch after a merge is if you plan to make any more changes to the same hotfix, which doesn't make much sense once you release the hotfix. So you should feel perfectly safe deleting the branch after the merge.
You can simply merge/rebase to reuse the branch which is the easiest possible scenario.
After the merge, it's safe to delete the branch:
git branch -d branch1 Additionally, git will warn you (and refuse to delete the branch) if it thinks you didn't fully merge it yet. If you forcefully delete a branch (with git branch -D) which is not completely merged yet, you have to do some tricks to get the unmerged commits back though (see below).
There are some reasons to keep a branch around though. For example, if it's a feature branch, you may want to be able to do bugfixes on that feature still inside that branch.
If you also want to delete the branch on a remote host, you can do:
git push origin :branch1 This will forcefully delete the branch on the remote (this will not affect already checked-out repositiories though and won't prevent anyone with push access to re-push/create it).
git reflog shows the recently checked out revisions. Any branch you've had checked out in the recent repository history will also show up there. Aside from that, git fsck will be the tool of choice at any case of commit-loss in git.
139
I prefer RENAME rather than DELETE
All my branches are named in the form of
Fix/fix-<somedescription> or Ftr/ftr-<somedescription> or Using Tower as my git front end, it neatly organizes all the Ftr/, Fix/, Test/ etc. into folders.
Once I am done with a branch, I rename them to Done/...-<description>.
That way they are still there (which can be handy to provide history) and I can always go back knowing what it was (feature, fix, test, etc.)
30
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
