Lucas Melo
-
Sinalizar
como inapropriado
-
Mostrar
Show review history
Yes, now it is correct: you are up to date with master, and on top of it, there are your changes. It is not that hard: usually, there are some commands for frequently used things, and they are repeated over and over again. Rebasing the code is a quite common practice: first you clone the master, and make your changes on top of it. Then, the original repository is updated, but your version is still based on the point when you cloned it. And then, saving your commits, and putting them on top of the history tree is a regular practice, which is repeated as long, as things are not merged, because this is how the end result will look like: there will be other changes merged first, and your changes on the top. This is needed mainly for one reason: to have a clear history, without having the unneeded information, that 20 different people fetched things from master 20 times, which created 400 "merged master to local" commits, which didn't change a single thing in the code, after being merged.
Yes, now it is correct: you are up to date with master, and on top of it, there are your changes. It is not that hard: usually, there are some commands for frequently used things, and they are repeated over and over again. Rebasing the code is a quite common practice: first you clone the master, and make your changes on top of it. Then, the original repository is updated, but your version is still based on the point when you cloned it. And then, saving your commits, and putting them on top of the history tree is a regular practice, which is repeated as long, as things are not merged, because this is how the end result will look like: there will be other changes merged first, and your changes on the top. This is needed mainly for one reason: to have a clear history, without having the unneeded information, that 20 different people fetched things from master 20 times, which created 400 "merged master to local" commits, which didn't change a single thing in the code, after being merged.
This review was marked as helpful by
4 people
Ronald Erick
-
Sinalizar
como inapropriado
Yes, now it is correct: you are up to date with master, and on top of it, there are your changes. It is not that hard: usually, there are some commands for frequently used things, and they are repeated over and over again. Rebasing the code is a quite common practice: first you clone the master, and make your changes on top of it. Then, the original repository is updated, but your version is still based on the point when you cloned it. And then, saving your commits, and putting them on top of the history tree is a regular practice, which is repeated as long, as things are not merged, because this is how the end result will look like: there will be other changes merged first, and your changes on the top. This is needed mainly for one reason: to have a clear history, without having the unneeded information, that 20 different people fetched things from master 20 times, which created 400 "merged master to local" commits, which didn't change a single thing in the code, after being merged.
This review was marked as helpful by
92 people
Albert
-
Sinalizar
como inapropriado
-
Show history of
Yes, now it is correct: you are up to date with master, and on top of it, there are your changes. It is not that hard: usually, there are some commands for frequently used things, and they are repeated over and over again. Rebasing the code is a quite common practice: first you clone the master, and make your changes on top of it. Then, the original repository is updated, but your version is still based on the point when you cloned it. And then, saving your commits, and putting them on top of the history tree is a regular practice, which is repeated as long, as things are not merged, because this is how the end result will look like: there will be other changes merged first, and your changes on the top. This is needed mainly for one reason: to have a clear history, without having the unneeded information, that 20 different people fetched things from master 20 times, which created 400 "merged master to local" commits, which didn't change a single thing in the code, after being merged.
This review was marked as helpful
by 853 people