toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Hi, I didn't know the option -t for git checkout, and I recommend this if the maintainer has cloned firstly his own repo hosted on GitHub, and later adds the remote of Bitbucket.
But the main point is to understand what is needed, that is, push changes to a stable branch of the Bitbucket repo, and pull changes from there, since it's used to place translated and translatable messages. And this could be achieved in different ways, deppending on what repo was cloned firstly (probably the repo of the maintainer outside of Bitbucket, but this is not mandatory and for instance sometimes I cloned firstly the Bitbucket repo and later my GitHub repo.
A possible and the most probable procedure could be:
# Clone the maintainer repo
git clone https://github.com/githubRepo
Add the remote for Bitbucket repo
remote add b https://bitbucket.org/nvdaaddonteam/bitbucketRepo
# Fetch Bitbucket repo
git fetch b
# Track the stable branch
git checkout -t b/stable
Optionally, we can set two push URLS to the origin remote, to push changes to both repos in one only step, not two. I did it for my computer at home. Here is an explanation:https://gist.githubusercontent.com/bjmiller121/f93cd974ff709d2b968f/raw/8f17c4d72ba8bd36aea0ec0cf344a8197fa648e8/multiple-push-urls.md
Also, you can look at this book about githttps://git-scm.com/book
I may reflect this in the Make add-ons translatable document, thanking to Luke for his contribution about git checkout -t tomorrow.
El 06/09/2019 a las 14:20, Doug Lee escribió:
So out of all this, what's the final set of steps for managing this sort of thing in Git? Or if the directions are up to date, a URL would be enough. I'm trying to save a pointer for the day I get round to tackling Git myself,
which perhaps amazingly has not happened yet. (I've used CVS back in the day, Subversion, and bzr but not Git.)
On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 01:29:42PM +0200, Noelia Ruiz wrote:
No, you aren't wrong. I misunderstood your previous email. I thought
you simply want to do: git checkout remote/stable.
2019-09-06 13:23 GMT+02:00, Luke Davis <luke@...>:
Hi, if you do what you suggest, you will be in detached head state,Are you sure?
Detached head state in this context usually only happens when you checkout a
The checkout docs say:
git checkout [-q] [-f] [-m] [[-b|-B|--orphan] <new_branch>] [<start_point>]
Create a new branch named <new_branch> and start it at <start_point>
It recommends looking at the branch documentation. In the branch
it says this about start-point:
When creating a new branch, set up configuration to mark the start-point
branch as "upstream" from 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.
This behavior is the default when the start point is a remote-tracking
So I am not clear why this would result in a detached head, especially
git always tells you when you are in detached-head, and does not say it for
"checkout -b stable translate/stable" # From my former email
While still on stable after that initial command:
git branch -vv
master 2f0e719 [origin/master] Starting work on v1.1.0. New version of
changelog in readme.
* stable b2c20c4 [translate/stable] l10n updates
# On branch stable
nothing to commit (working directory clean)
But if I checkout a commit, which detaches the head, I get:
# Not currently on any branch.
nothing to commit (working directory clean)
> and then if you want to modify something, for instance merging changes
from the remote stable branch made after you have performed gitMaybe that is where the miscommunication is? I did not mean to checkout to
checkout to remote/stable, your stable branch won't be updated
remote/stable (or translate/stable, in my example) every time, just the
I was only saying that in your original steps, to create the branch, instead
git checkout -b stable
git branch -u translate/stable # Which doesn't work on older git
You can just do:
git checkout -b stable translate/stable
Or even as simple as:
git checkout -t translate/stable
Branch stable set up to track remote branch stable from translate.
Switched to a new branch 'stable'
I am pretty sure that neither of those should create a detached head (which
sounds very painful, at least briefly).
Of course after that, you have to run:
git checkout stable
to reach the branch as usual from other branches.
Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but I am not getting any detached
or confused branches in doing it this way, and it is a command that at least
seems to work for old and new git the same, which git branch's methods of
setting up tracking don't.