Having a fork match the original repo when the original master branch can't be merged in?

Posted by a2h on Stack Overflow See other posts from Stack Overflow or by a2h
Published on 2011-01-16T04:49:40Z Indexed on 2011/01/16 4:53 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 206

Filed under:
|
|

The related questions that SO offer me only answer simple cases that can be solved with a pull - however, that won't work for my case.

There's a repository I've forked, with just a master branch, and I've forked it, and I've worked in both my master, and a new branch of my own, rw-style. The owner of the forked repository's committed some of my changes but not others; the black dots on the top right below represent commits from both my master and rw-style branches.

alt text

I'm aware using the fork queue is not a good idea, so I'm staying away from it. Using git pull does work, but it creates a conflict that I would then need to resolve, and it also results in duplicate history for my master branch, and that doesn't look particularly pretty.

I don't know any other solutions right now, so I'm currently considering just creating a patch from two commits that I haven't yet pushed, deleting my fork, creating it again from the original, and then applying my patches on top of it.

Is that the only solution?

© Stack Overflow or respective owner

Related posts about git

Related posts about version-control