driving_croonerGit, invented in 2005. Programmers on 2004:
Arsecroftthis guy would have force pushed onto main about 10 mins after this
Lucy :3Tbf you have to do that for the first push, if a Readme file way autogenerated
dev_nullYou don’t if you just clone the repo you created.
Huh? I’m talking about existing code being in a dir, then initting a git repo there, creating a pendant on your hoster of choice and then pushing it there. Wouldn’t cloning the repo from step 3 to the code from step 1 overwrite the contents there?
Yeah, I was thinking of a new repo with no existing code.
In your case you’d want to uncheck the creation of a readme so the hosted repo is empty and can be pushed to without having to overwrite (force) anything.
Clone into new branch, merge, push.
I never use force.
HoimoIf your remote is completely empty and has no commits, you can just push normally. If it has an auto-generated “initial commit” (pretty sure Github does something like that), you could force push, or merge your local branch into the remote branch and push normally. I think cloning the repo and copying the contents of your local repo into it is the worst option: you’ll lose all local commits.
True, in the situation with a local history maybe it’s worthwhile to --force to nuke an empty remote. In that case it is practical… I just typically like to find non-force options.
EthanYou can also just tell GitHub to not do that.
If it’s a single, generated, “initial” commit that I actually want to keep (say, for ex I used the forge to generate a license file) then I would often rebase on top of it. Quick and doesn’t get rid of anything.
If your remote is completely empty and has no commits, you can just push normally. If it has an auto-generated “initial commit” (pretty sure Github does something like that), you could force push, or merge your local branch into the remote branch and push normally. I think cloning the repo and copying the contents of your local repo into it is the worst option: you’ll lose all local commits.