Button to allow us to 'sync'/pull upstream changes for forked repos

[0xdevalias]

Firstly, I know this can be done through git fetch/merge/push (as outlined at Github Help: Syncing a Fork)

I figured this would be a convenient feature given that we can fork/edit/submit pull requests all from the browser these days. But once we've forked something, to keep it up to date we have to drop back to command line/client.

Obviously this would require a bit more effort/engineering in places where a fast-forward merge isn't possible.

My 2c.

(Will be sending this to support@github.com shortly Sent!)

[albertosantini]

I second @alias1 feature request.

Feature Abstract

It would be nice updating a forked project, pulling the upstream commits to the origin without a terminal or a local git repository.

As (web) workaround, you need to delete the fork and forking again the project.

Use case

Imagine I have not a terminal or I am behind a company proxy (and I am too lazy to set a token or to authorize the company email) or I am using an internet cafe connection.

I have only a browser and I need to submit a PR on a forked project of mine.

Firstly I need to pull the latest commits from the upstream.

Proposal

To add a button close to the list of the branches to pull that branch (only fast forward) from upstream.

(email to GitHub support sent)

[albertosantini]

From GitHub support:

Thanks for the suggestion. We've had this requested before, so I've added a +1 to this item on our internal Feature Request List. We can't promise if we might add something like this, however your feedback is definitely appreciated.

[mrec]

Thirded. It turns out there is a way to do this via the browser UI, as described in this StackOverflow answer. However:

1. It's monumentally unintuitive.
2. Merging your own PR shows up as a contribution in your activity history, which makes a bit of a mockery of the whole concept.

What's weird about this missing feature is that GitHub appears to have implemented it at one point back in 2008, and then removed it for reasons unknown. Frustrating.

[Mithgol]

Wow. Deep magic. Impressive.

[cirosantilli]

Web API Pull request resolution request: #200

[navarr]

I just sent support a very similar feature request, included below:

---

Being able to fork a repository is a massively helpful feature that allows users to help contribute to open source - but an interesting problem, at least for multiple contributions, is how easy it is for their local fork to get out of sync with upstream (provided that they aren't trying to maintain an actual "fork")

So my request/suggestion is a way to sync with upstream's master. There are a couple of ways to solve this, and one or all could theoretically be implemented.

Idea #1: Allow users to fork existing branches as read-only and essentially make them a symlink to the upstream branch. This would encourage more casual contributors to fork the upstream so they may submit pull requests against it's main branches without having to keep their own copy up-to-date.

Idea #2: If a fork of a branch can be fast-forwarded from the parent's same branch, add a "sync" button that does the same thing as a pull request but without the merge commit - as it is silly to --no-ff when you're keeping a branch in sync with upstream.

---

Since this FR is essentially Idea 2 - should I create a separate issue for idea 1?

[iliaskarim]

"Fast Forward Your Work" is a crucial feature.

Color me astonished that it don't doesn't already exist on github.

[vorburger]

+1 ... this would be nice and very useful in some use cases. Tx @mrec for the S.O. tip, useful workaround.

[thread13]

+1

[jawinn]

Thirded. It turns out there is a way to do this via the browser UI, as described in this StackOverflow answer. However:
It's monumentally unintuitive.

This.

[michellemay]

I would add that it is painfull to do this git fetch/merge/push for multiple branches!
We need a "keep my fork in sync with all upstream branches"! I hate having a fork go out of sync and I always end-up deleting my fork and starting over again! This is counter productive for the fork/branch/commit/pullrequest workflow..

[serapath]

+1

[Gazzonyx]

The worst part of the web workflow is as follows :
Let's pretend I have forked https://github.com/samba-team/samba and I want to update the README with instructions on how to use GitHub to submit patches (Hey! That's exactly the simple task I want to do! What are the chances?).
First I sync up to upstream and then create a branch for this change. Then I make the change and send a pull request. Now my sync commit is part of the pull request that does nothing (because it's all the same) and has nothing to do with the README change. Hooray! Confusion ensues. And so help you when you find out that the online editor wraps differently than the README is displayed in the same space. Now we're just piling on to the pull request.

From my point of view, syncing should be squashed from pull requests when the target is the source of the sync. IE, downstream syncs never get added to upstream pull requests when that upstream was the source of the sync.

[jakirkham]

It looks like there now is an update branch button. So, this may already be solved.

[albertosantini]

@jakirkham agreed.

We can close this issue.