Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

7
  • 1
    So easy! I may have just converted from gitg to gitk.
    – Michael Cole
    Commented Jun 3, 2016 at 19:58
  • This way, however, the tracking branch information is lost.
    – mbdevpl
    Commented Jun 14, 2017 at 8:23
  • @mbdevpl: I'm not really a git expert. I think I understand what you mean, but not the implications. I've used this fairly often, and still been able to push those branches to branches of the same name on a remote. What does the association between a branch and its remote-tracking branch do for you?
    – Peter Cordes
    Commented Jun 14, 2017 at 16:41
  • @mbdevpl: does that mostly only matter when your local branch has a different name from the remote branch it's tracking?
    – Peter Cordes
    Commented Jun 14, 2017 at 16:50
  • 1
    @PeterCordes Ineed, when branch names don't match it matters. Also when there is more than one remote. Also when you're using git prompt to display branch status, it'll show commit distance to your tracking branch (if it's set). Also, git status output is affected. Additionally, in some cases git fetch and git push won't work without specifying remote explicitly if you don't set the tracking branch. I don't know about all the cases, but for me the general rule of thumb is that for convenience and speed of work, it's better to have tracking branches in order.
    – mbdevpl
    Commented Jun 15, 2017 at 10:53