What is the difference between doing (after mkdir repo and cd repo):
git init
git remote add origin git://github.com/cmcculloh/repo.git
git fetch --all
git pull origin master
and
git clone git://github.com/cmcculloh/repo.git
I mean, obviously one is shorter, but other than that are they basically doing the same thing?
Miss Clone: I get a fresh copy to local.
Mr Pull: I already have it locally, I just update it.
Miss Clone: I can do what you do! You are just my subset.
Mr Pull: Ditto!
Miss Clone: No, you don't create. This is what I do:
You only do #3, and then you merge(fetch + merge), which I do not need to do. Mine is fresh... girl!
Mr Pull: Smarty pants, no big deal, I will do a "git init" first! Then we are the same.
Miss Clone: No dear, don't you need a 'checked-out branch'... the git checkout? Who will do it? me!
Mr Pull: Oh right.. I need a checked-out local branch to act on. But wait.. you checkout master branch by default. Does anyone work on master branch? No! You are delivering a feature that is perhaps never used! I let the user decide the best branch to checkout and that is how I roll!
Git creators: Hold your horses Mr Pull, if --bare or --mirror is used with clone or init, your merge won't happen. It remains read-only. And for you Miss Clone, git checkout can be replaced with a git fetch <remote> <srcBranch>:<destBranch> unless you want to use a -s <strategy> with pull which is missing in fetch.
Miss Clone: Somehow I feel like a winner already but let me drop this too: my command applies to all the branches in the repository. Are you that broad minded Mr. Pull?
Mr. Pull: I am broad minded when it comes to fetching all the branch names(just the 'name') from the repo. Because I don't like to fetch unnecessary branches. But the merge will happen only on the current checked out branch. Exclusivity is the name! And in your case too, you only check-out one branch.
Git Creators: Just one addition: Miss Clone can be restricted to just one branch if needed: git clone --single-branch --branch <branch name> <url>
git clone is used for just downloading exactly what is currently working on the remote server repository and saving it in your machine's folder where that project is placed. Mostly it is used only when we are going to upload the project for the first time. After that pull is the better option.
git pull is basically a (clone(download) + merge) operation and mostly used when you are working as teamwork. In other words, when you want the recent changes in that project, you can pull.
git clone <remote-url> <=>
git init // init new repositorygit remote add origin <remote-url> // add remotegit fetch // fetch all remote branchsgit switch <default_branch> // switch to the default branchgit pull <=>
git pull <remote> <branch> <=>
While the git fetch command will fetch down all the changes on the server that you don’t have yet, it will not modify your working directory at all. It will simply get the data for you and let you merge it yourself. However, there is a command called git pull which is essentially a git fetch immediately followed by a git merge in most cases.
Read more: https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Git-Branching-Remote-Branches#Pulling
git clone URL ---> Complete project or repository will be downloaded as a seperate directory. and not just the changes git pull URL ---> fetch + merge --> It will only fetch the changes that have been done and not the entire project
Clone-: It will create exactly duplicate copy of your remote repository project in your local machine.
Pull-: Suppose two or more than two people are sharing the same repository. (Suppose another person name is Syam) (A Repository is a place where your project exist in Github) So if Syam does some changes in the same project in his local and pushes it to the remote repository So whatever the changes Syam did those changes will not reflect in your local. So to reflect those new changes in your local you have to use git pull. Overall we use git pull to update the project.
So basically we use git clone only once whereas we use git pull many times.