767
Git, invented in 2005. Programmers on 2004: (lemmy.eco.br)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/programmer_humor@programming.dev
157 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 154 points 2 years ago* (14 children)

this guy would have force pushed onto main about 10 mins after this if he did have git

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (11 children)

    Tbf you have to do that for the first push, if a Readme file was autogenerated

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (8 children)

    You don't if you just clone the repo you created.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (7 children)

    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?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (4 children)

    There are multiple solutions to this without using --force.

    Move the files, clone, unmove the files, commit, push being the most straightforward that I can summon at this time.. but I've solved this dozens of times and have never use --force.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 2 years ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    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.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent