Skip to main content

Pushing Specific Commit in Eclipse Git

This post describes the real-world scenario, then offers the steps to solve the issue at the bottom. If you are in a hurry, jump to the end of the post to see the steps in Eclipse, without my self-indulgent story-telling!

A few months ago, my team switched from the ancient Visual SourceSafe to Git. While we tried to minimize the process impact, the change-over was such a big shift in thinking that, months later, I still field several questions a week.

Here is a recent trouble-shooting sample: a colleague got caught in mid-task with an urgent fix, and mucked up some commits in her local repository. Her question: how can only the fix-commit be pushed.

Email excerpt:
Hey Steve!
Okay - so I have 2 files that I need to push to repository X for a high priority fix for tomorrow.

I have a 3rd file that I was in the middle of changing when I had to interrupt to get the high priority one fixed and in.  It is currently in a state of flux and full of errors.

But when I went to do a pull so that I could push the 2 needed files, I was forced to commit my changes to the 3rd file or lose them.  I didn’t want to lose them, so I committed them.

But I need to push the 2 good files and I don’t want to break things by pushing the 3rd not-yet-ready file.

What do I do?????
(end email excerpt)
I can see from the scenario that my colleague had not been doing her development in a Feature Branch, but rather was doing all her work on her local main dev branch. So my follow-up with her included (once again) stressing local feature branches off the dev branch as a recommended practice.

Then, when something like this comes up, you can stash the in-progress changes in the branch, check out the dev branch to change/commit/push, and then check out the feature branch again and restore the stash.

That advice can help my colleague avoid the issue in the future. But how to get out of the present bind? I told her something like the following:

If you have already pushed the unwanted commit upstream, consider it to be “set in stone” and you should proceed like any other bug fix. Since the unwanted commit likely broke the build, you should give your full attention to fixing or restoring it to a compiling / running state.

If the unwanted commit has not yet been pushed upstream, try this:

Make a backup copy of the work-in-progress file, because these steps will reset it to the last committed version before your commit.

 Go to your History view, you should see the 2 commits of which we only want 1.

On the History view, highlight the commit BEFORE them in the history. Right-click and select Rebase Interactive.

 In the Rebase Interactive view, highlight the bad commit and click on “Skip” It should change the Action scheduled for that commit.


Click “Start” and Eclipse will perform a rebase, skipping the bad commit (essentially deleting it from your local – with all your in-progress changes).

 In your history view you should have just the one, desired commit. Push it upstream.

 Put your in-progress changes back in place from your backup of the file.

For further reading, check out some of these links:

Popular posts from this blog

Git Reset in Eclipse

Using Git and the Eclipse IDE, you have a series of commits in your branch history, but need to back up to an earlier version. The Git Reset feature is a powerful tool with just a whiff of danger, and is accessible with just a couple clicks in Eclipse. In Eclipse, switch to the History view. In my example it shows a series of 3 changes, 3 separate committed versions of the Person file. After commit 6d5ef3e, the HEAD (shown), Index, and Working Directory all have the same version, Person 3.0.

Scala Collections: A Group of groupBy() Examples

Scala provides a rich Collections API. Let's look at the useful groupBy() function. What does groupBy() do? It takes a collection, assesses each item in that collection against a discriminator function, and returns a Map data structure. Each key in the returned map is a distinct result of the discriminator function, and the key's corresponding value is another collection which contains all elements of the original one that evaluate the same way against the discriminator function. So, for example, here is a collection of Strings: val sports = Seq ("baseball", "ice hockey", "football", "basketball", "110m hurdles", "field hockey") Running it through the Scala interpreter produces this output showing our value's definition: sports: Seq[String] = List(baseball, ice hockey, football, basketball, 110m hurdles, field hockey) We can group those sports names by, say, their first letter. To do so, we need a disc

Java 8: Rewrite For-loops using Stream API

Java 8 Tip: Anytime you write a Java For-loop, ask yourself if you can rewrite it with the Streams API. Now that I have moved to Java 8 in my work and home development, whenever I want to use a For-loop, I write it and then see if I can rewrite it using the Stream API. For example: I have an object called myThing, some Collection-like data structure which contains an arbitrary number of Fields. Something has happened, and I want to set all of the fields to some common state, in my case "Hidden"

How to do Git Rebase in Eclipse

This is an abbreviated version of a fuller post about Git Rebase in Eclipse. See the longer one here : One side-effect of merging Git branches is that it leaves a Merge commit. This can create a history view something like: The clutter of parallel lines shows the life spans of those local branches, and extra commits (nine in the above screen-shot, marked by the green arrows icon). Check out this extreme-case history:  http://agentdero.cachefly.net/unethicalblogger.com/images/branch_madness.jpeg Merge Commits show all the gory details of how the code base evolved. For some teams, that’s what they want or need, all the time. Others may find it unnecessarily long and cluttered. They prefer the history to tell the bigger story, and not dwell on tiny details like every trivial Merge-commit. Git Rebase offers us 2 benefits over Git Merge: First, Rebase allows us to clean up a set of local commits before pushing them to the shared, central repository. For this

Code Coverage in C#.NET Unit Tests - Setting up OpenCover

The purpose of this post is to be a brain-dump for how we set up and used OpenCover and ReportGenerator command-line tools for code coverage analysis and reporting in our projects. The documentation made some assumptions that took some digging to fully understand, so to save my (and maybe others') time and effort in the future, here are my notes. Our project, which I will call CEP for short, includes a handful of sub-projects within the same solution. They are a mix of Web APIs, ASP MVC applications and Class libraries. For Unit Tests, we chose to write them using the MSTest framework, along with the Moq mocking framework. As the various sub-projects evolved, we needed to know more about the coverage of our automated tests. What classes, methods and instructions had tests exercising them, and what ones did not? Code Coverage tools are conveniently built-in for Visual Studio 2017 Enterprise Edition, but not for our Professional Edition installations. Much less for any Commun