We're all familiar with that one. Useful when you have a library you don't want to include as a submodule. For illustration, imagine you have a project that has a master, and then three branches to merge in call them a, b, and c. A merge can have no conflicts even if the files on the two branches are different, as long as the differing lines are in different locations of the file. I'm not familiar with resolve, but I've used the others: Recursive Recursive is the default for non-fast-forward merges.
Would you like to answer one of these instead? Maybe we can just merge the whole branch using --squash, keep the files we want, and throw away the rest. Only these commits will then be integrated as a result. It is meant to be used to supersede old development history of side branches. Concept Integrating Branches - Not Individual Commits When starting a merge, you don't have to and cannot pick individual commits that shall be integrated. You can cancel an unfinished rebase operation or resume an interrupted rebase by selecting the Abort or Continue actions respectively from the top of the Git Branches popup. Here is a quick lesson on what it does and an example use case.
Git cherry-pick allows you to merge a single commit from one branch into another. An octopus branch merges multiple heads in one commit as long as it can do it cleanly. Something comes up, and you need to add some of the code from that branch back into your mainline development branch. But we want to be done with this task in ten seconds, not ten minutes. The result of the merge is a new on the current branch. But there will come a time when you want to integrate changes from one branch into another.
Instead, you tell Git which branch you want to integrate - and Git will figure out which commits you don't have in your current working branch. If there are conflicts, you can resolve those the usual way and commit when done. PyCharm will display the Commit Changes dialog with the automatically generated commit message. Note that if you click Cancel, a separate changelist will be created with the selected changes that you can see in the Local Changes tab. Or you may want to backport a fix to a previous release branch, etc. In Git, performing a merge is easy as pie. Small commits allow for big wins.
Instead of having the developer apply the change manually to the Drupal 7 version that developer can use Git cherry-pick for commit and carry on. Or, if these are slight changes that do cause conflict, at least the conflict should be easy for the developer to handle. PyCharm allows you to do so by using the Cherry-pick action. Or maybe the other way around: you're not yet finished working on your feature, but so many things have happened in the rest of the project in the meantime that you want to integrate these back into your feature branch. It tries to carefully detect criss-cross merge ambiguities and is considered generally safe and fast. Why would I use this? If you select this option, PyCharm will uncommitted changes, perform merge, and then unstash the changes.
Additionally this can detect and handle merges involving renames. A series of recursive merges would look like this note that the first merge was a fast-forward, as I didn't force recursion : However, a single octopus merge would look like this: commit ae632e99ba0ccd0e9e06d09e8647659220d043b9 Merge: f51262e. Why would you cherry-pick instead of just merging one branch into the other? I'm still not exactly sure why. We just want to grab these files in their current state in the feature branch and drop them into the master branch. If your working tree is clean i. This is the default merge strategy when pulling or merging one branch.
A common use case for Drupal module maintainers is when a security vulnerability has been identified and fixed in a Drupal version number and has to be applied to others. The branches are just merged and nothing is done to the files. Actually the only two strategies you would want to choose are ours if you want to abandon changes brought by branch, but keep the branch in history, and subtree if you are merging independent project into subdirectory of superproject like 'git-gui' in 'git' repository. This is actually not as bad as it sounds. The good news is there are a lot of tools to help the merge go smoothly. Think of it like a knot that connects two branches.
In that case, Git detects that it's remerging some changes that are already in place and skips the duplicate changes, avoiding the conflict. Note that the log lists all commits. Is this not the correct way to cherry pick with SourceTree? Merging Changes Keeping your commits in the separate context of a branch is a huge help. This keeps the history of a branch without any of the effects of the branch. Read: It is not even looked at the changes between those branches. From the man page on git-merge, there are a number of merge strategies you can use. This is the default merge strategy when pulling or merging more than one branches.