[Biopython-dev] Working directly on the main git repository

[Rodrigo Faccioli]

About your Github's problem, you may try to perform the command below, after
you removed your local branch.

git push git at github.com:<my_account>/<my_repository>.git :heads/<mybranch>

I've found the command below in [1].

[1]
http://originblog.wordpress.com/2008/04/28/github-tips-removing-a-remote-branch/

Thanks in advance,

--
Rodrigo Antonio Faccioli
Ph.D Student in Electrical Engineering
University of Sao Paulo - USP
Engineering School of Sao Carlos - EESC
Department of Electrical Engineering - SEL
Intelligent System in Structure Bioinformatics
http://laips.sel.eesc.usp.br
Phone: 55 (16) 3373-9366 Ext 229
Curriculum Lattes - http://lattes.cnpq.br/1025157978990218
Public Profile - http://br.linkedin.com/pub/rodrigo-faccioli/7/589/a5


On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 6:45 PM, Eric Talevich <eric.talevich at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 5:35 AM, Peter <biopython at maubp.freeserve.co.uk
> >wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I thought I'd write down some notes about how I've been using git
> recently.
> > This may be of interest to any of the other core developers (those of us
> > with read-write access to the main repository), and I might get some good
> > tips from any discussion. The key point is that I have read+write access
> > to two repositories on github (the official repository AND my own fork),
> > so there are different advantages/disadvantages about which I choose
> > to work with directly as my main repository.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > Instead, I have a github repository of my own (what github calls a
> > fork), and I push branches there.
> >
> > http://github.com/biopython/biopython - the official branch(es)
> > http://github.com/peterjc/biopython - my branches
> >
> > How does this work in practice? Like this - I clone the master
> > and add a reference to my repository (and I do the same when I
> > want to grab a branch from another developer):
> >
> > git clone git at github.com:biopython/biopython.git
> > cd biopython
> > git remote add peterjc git at github.com:peterjc/biopython.git
> > git fetch peterjc
> >
> > Then make a new local branch as usual, and when ready to share
> > it publicly, I push it to *my* repository on github:
> >
> > git branch new-work
> > git checkout new-work
> > git commit ...
> > git push peterjc new-work
> >
> > This would then appear as a new-work branch on my github page.
> > Then if I (or someone else) wants to access these branches later
> > (e.g. from another machine) just use the checkout tracked remote
> > branch. For example,
> >
> > git clone git at github.com:biopython/biopython.git
> > cd biopython
> > git remote add peterjc git at github.com:peterjc/biopython.git
> > git fetch peterjc
> > git checkout -t peterjc/seqio-imgt
> >
> > This then looks like a normal branch (called just "seqio-imgt" in
> > this example), but git knows it is linked to the remote branch on
> > the "peterjc" repository (not the origin which is the "official"
> > repository).
> >
>
> This looks reasonable to me. I'd add that the procedure to delete a public
> branch from your personal fork on GitHub is a little obscure:
>
> git branch -a   # list local and remote branches
> git branch -d new-work   # delete a local branch that's been merged already
> git push peterjc :new-work  # delete the public branch from GitHub
>
> This doesn't do what you'd expect:
> git branch -d peterjc/new-work
>
> That only removes your local reference to the the public branch; the branch
> is still visible on GitHub.
>
> (It's kind of hard to find in the GitHub documentation.)
>
>
> I'd have to check, but I guess that if the original git clone is done
> > with git://github.com/biopython/biopython.git instead (read only
> > access) the same procedure could be used by non core devs.
> > However, I'm not sure this is clearer for them. I think the current
> > procedure (on our wiki) where you add a remote reference to
> > the "upstream" official repository works better in this case.
> >
>
> I still have an "upstream" reference to the main repo. I wouldn't want to
> accidentally push something foolish to the main repo with a stray "git
> push"... better to have the safe thing happen by default.
>
> If the initial clone was from biopython master, and you later create a
> personal forkon GitHub, then it's not too hard to switch the references
> around in your local repo to make the public fork your "origin".
>
> -Eric
> _______________________________________________
> Biopython-dev mailing list
> Biopython-dev at lists.open-bio.org
> http://lists.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biopython-dev
>