Why does git merge a branch into itself?
This scenario is not unusual.
The key here is that the branches being merged are different: it's the remote repository's develop
branch being merged into the developer's local (working) develop
branch.
In the developer's local repository there are two distinct branches:
develop
= The branch he/she is currently working on. The new commits go here.origin/develop
= This is essentially a snapshot that the current repository holds about the state of thedevelop
branch on the remote server. It gets updated with the remote changes when you dofetch
orpull
, and with the local changes after a successfulpush
.
Now, when you do git pull
, two things happen. This is because git pull
is essentially an alias for other two git operations: fetch
and merge
:
fetch
- brings all new commits (if any) from the remote repository to the localorigin/develop
branch.merge
- takes the new commits and applies them to the local workingdevelop branch
. This can happen in one of two ways:- if the local working branch does not contain divergent history (new commits that the remote does not know about), then it simply advances the
develop
branch pointer ahead, so that it points to the latest commit inorigin/develop
. This is known as a fast-forward merge. - if the developer has some new commits of his own that are not present in the remote repo, and, therefore not in the
origin/develop
branch, then a regular merge is done, meaning that there's a new commit, containing the changes from both branches. By default, git assigns messages like these to such commits:Merge branch 'develop' of https://bitbucket.org/abc/xyz into develop
.
- if the local working branch does not contain divergent history (new commits that the remote does not know about), then it simply advances the
So, the scenario is a pretty common one.
Now, if this happens very often and you don't like to see very complex commit history graphs containing commits like the one we're talking about, try looking into using rebase
instead of merge.
You can do this two ways (when getting the changes from the remote server):
git fetch; git rebase
git pull --rebase
The owner had some commits on develop that they had not pushed, then ran git pull
and fetched/merged in new commits from develop that were in the remote repo.
If you want to avoid this type of merge stash before pulling, like this:
git stash
git pull
git stash pop