Repository navigation
Re-running the utility does not update the local files #269
Description
Expected behavior: I run the utility again and the modified files are synchronized.
But the files remain unchanged.
~$ github-backup --version
github-backup 0.45.1
Steps
- Create test repo. My test repo: https://github.com/itdoginfo/test-python-github-backup
- Run utility
github-backup itdoginfo --all -f github_key -o /home/user/test-python-github-backup/ -R test-python-github-backup
- Check README.md
~$ cat test-python-github-backup/repositories/test-python-github-backup/repository/README.md
# test-python-github-backup
1
- Add string to README.md
String after first backup. Main branch - Re-run utility. Identical command from step three
- Check README.md
~$ cat test-python-github-backup/repositories/test-python-github-backup/repository/README.md
# test-python-github-backup
1
Maybe I don't understand something and I need to use some additional flags?
Activity
whwright commentedon Jun 14, 2024
Existing repos will only have their remotes fetched:
python-github-backup/github_backup/github_backup.py
Line 1324 in c3e470b
so checkout the remote branch or merge it into the local copy.
git merge origin/mainfor exampleparanerd commentedon Jul 4, 2024
Thank you for opening this issue. Just ran into the same problem (?)
Is there a way to either replace
git fetchwithgit pullor run an additional (optional)git mergeafter fetching?I'm using this on a Synology NAS and would like to be able to browse the latest files in the file explorer instead of having to go into the terminal to
git mergemanually.Thanks!
whwright commentedon Jul 9, 2024
This has come up several times, duplicate issue here #196
You can't assume a merge will always be clean, so IMO this introduces unnecessary complexity to handle potential conflicts and isn't really necessary.
paranerd commentedon Jul 9, 2024
Yes, I do understand. However, how about at least giving the option. In my case, for example, I use the tool for archive purposes only so will not very likely ever run into any conflicts whatsoever.
But as long as my data is still backed up even without the additional
mergeI'm fine with the status quo 😊josegonzalez commentedon Jul 9, 2024
As mentioned in the readme:
pa-0 commentedon Jul 22, 2024
@itdoginfo For clarity, when the script fetches 'remote' branches, the git descriptors can be misleading, because those 'remote' branches are actually available locally. You can checkout a remote branch (which, again, is saved on your local drive at this point) or if you're not concerned with losing anything in your local branches, you can run a simple PowerShell script to loop through all repositories, running
git mergeon each.Also, FYI: https://github.com/earwig/git-repo-updater <- Another python script you can simply run after backup in lieu of PowerShell. You could even add a line to the end of
github-backupthat simply calls this script to achieve the functionality you're requesting.Iamrodos commentedon Dec 3, 2025
@josegonzalez this can be closed as it was addressed by #457