你基本上有两个选择:

You merge. That is actually quite simple, and a perfectly local operation: git checkout b1 git merge master # repeat for b2 and b3 This leaves the history exactly as it happened: You forked from master, you made changes to all branches, and finally you incorporated the changes from master into all three branches. git can handle this situation really well, it is designed for merges happening in all directions, at the same time. You can trust it be able to get all threads together correctly. It simply does not care whether branch b1 merges master, or master merges b1, the merge commit looks all the same to git. The only difference is, which branch ends up pointing to this merge commit. You rebase. People with an SVN, or similar background find this more intuitive. The commands are analogue to the merge case: git checkout b1 git rebase master # repeat for b2 and b3 People like this approach because it retains a linear history in all branches. However, this linear history is a lie, and you should be aware that it is. Consider this commit graph: A --- B --- C --- D <-- master \ \-- E --- F --- G <-- b1 The merge results in the true history: A --- B --- C --- D <-- master \ \ \-- E --- F --- G +-- H <-- b1 The rebase, however, gives you this history: A --- B --- C --- D <-- master \ \-- E' --- F' --- G' <-- b1 The point is, that the commits E', F', and G' never truly existed, and have likely never been tested. They may not even compile. It is actually quite easy to create nonsensical commits via a rebase, especially when the changes in master are important to the development in b1. The consequence of this may be, that you can't distinguish which of the three commits E, F, and G actually introduced a regression, diminishing the value of git bisect. I am not saying that you shouldn't use git rebase. It has its uses. But whenever you do use it, you need to be aware of the fact that you are lying about history. And you should at least compile test the new commits.

如果你想要恢复到上一次提交并删除日志历史记录

使用下面的命令，让我们假设你想要去到以前的提交，它有commititid SHA - 71e2e57458bde883a37b332035f784c6653ec509，你可以指向这个提交，它将不会显示任何日志消息在这个提交之后，所有的历史将被擦除。

git push origin +71e2e57458bde883a37b332035f784c6653ec509^:master

用你的主分支副本更新其他分支，如(备份)。 你可以按照任何一种方式(rebase或merge)…

做rebase(不会有任何额外的提交到备份分支)。 合并分支(将有一个额外的自动提交到 备份分支)。 注:Rebase只是建立一个新的base(一个新的副本)

git 结帐备份 Git 合并大师 git push

(重复执行其他分支，如backup2等)

git 结帐备份 git 变基大师 git push

(重复执行其他分支，如backup2等)

您可以合并，也可以使用git的选择性跨分支应用单独的提交。

如果你一直在一个分支上断断续续地工作，或者在你工作的时候其他分支发生了很多事情，最好将你的分支重新建立在master上。这样可以保持历史的整洁，使事情更容易理解。

git checkout master
git pull
git checkout local_branch_name
git rebase master
git push --force # force required if you've already pushed

注:

不要改变你与他人合作的分支。 您应该基于将要合并到的分支，该分支可能并不总是主分支。

http://git-scm.com/book/ch3-6.html上有一章是关于改变基础的，网上还有很多其他的资源。

令人惊讶的是，我最常用的方法没有被提及。这在基于Trunk的开发风格中是很常见的，其中main不断更新，并且从它的分支中工作。

假设main已经有了更新的代码，并且你在分支b1中。如果不是这种情况，您将需要git fetch。

因此，要用main中所做的更改更新b1，只需使用

git pull origin main

当您或其他人到达其他分支并想要更新时，也必须在其他分支中进行相同的操作。