Cofounded Host Collective (DiscountASP.net). Cofounded Player Axis (Social Gaming). Computer Scientist and Technology Evangelist with 20+ years of experience with JavaScript!
No point wasting extra bandwidth to pull the entire thing down from scratch each time.
The whole thing is pulled down during git fetch.
Otherwise there is no way you could create a new branch off of it.
This can be confirmed by disconnecting from the internet during the internet during the git checkout stage or by doing a git branch -a to see all available branches.
There is no avoiding pulling the whole master branch.
Cofounded Host Collective (DiscountASP.net). Cofounded Player Axis (Social Gaming). Computer Scientist and Technology Evangelist with 20+ years of experience with JavaScript!
You pull the entire thing down the first time with git fetch, and then the incremental changes later with a basic git pull.
git pull and git fetch will use the same bandwidth. The difference between the two is git pull will also perform a merge. But you could do a git fetch and then a merge to achieve the same results of a pull.
you'll still saving yourself a step by not deleting master off your local copy every time.
The method laid out by OP would only require deleting the local version of master one time, not every time.
But because both pull and fetch get all files. There isn't much saved by performing the process described in the original tweets.
Cofounded Host Collective (DiscountASP.net). Cofounded Player Axis (Social Gaming). Computer Scientist and Technology Evangelist with 20+ years of experience with JavaScript!
don't create extra work for yourself by deleting it (yes, locally) when you're only going to need it again.
The main point of OP's post was that you can delete the master branch locally because using the process laid out above, you would never need a local master branch again.
There is no extra work. It is actually less work. You would only need to run 2 commands instead of 3 and with any pull, there is the possibility of merge conflicts.
normal method
git checkout master
git pull # possible merge conflicts here
git checkout -b my-new-branch
The whole thing is pulled down during
git fetch.Otherwise there is no way you could create a new branch off of it.
This can be confirmed by disconnecting from the internet during the internet during the
git checkoutstage or by doing agit branch -ato see all available branches.There is no avoiding pulling the whole master branch.
git pullandgit fetchwill use the same bandwidth. The difference between the two isgit pullwill also perform a merge. But you could do agit fetchand then amergeto achieve the same results of apull.The method laid out by OP would only require deleting the local version of master one time, not every time.
But because both
pullandfetchget all files. There isn't much saved by performing the process described in the original tweets.The main point of OP's post was that you can delete the master branch locally because using the process laid out above, you would never need a local master branch again.
There is no extra work. It is actually less work. You would only need to run 2 commands instead of 3 and with any
pull, there is the possibility of merge conflicts.normal method
OP's method