Re: Creating new remote branch in git?

On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 06:40, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> Joe Abbate <jma(at)freedomcircle(dot)com> writes:
>>> No, it doesn't trash anything.  The branch is just an additional
>>> "pointer" to 'master' (at that point in time).  I recommend taking a
>>> look at this:
>>
>>> http://progit.org/book/ch3-5.html
>>
>> Yes, I was reading exactly that before posting.  It talks about pushing
>> a branch you've created locally, and it talks about what happens when
>> others pull that down, and it's about as clear as mud w/r/t how the
>> original pusher sees the remote branch.  What I want is to end up
>> with my local branch tracking the remote branch in the same way as if
>> I'd not been the branch creator.  Preferably without having to do
>> anything as ugly as delete the branch, or re-clone, or manually hack
>> config files.  This has got to be a use case that the git authors
>> have heard of before...
>
> I think you need the -u parameter to "git push". (Haven't tested, though)

Yeah. I *think* the right incantation might be:

git branch REL9_1_STABLE
git push -u origin REL9_1_STABLE

Actually, creating the branch is trivial. I do that all the time.
What I'm less sure about is how you get the push configuration set up
right. But I think the above might do it. I'd read .git/config
afterward just to see if it looks sane.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company