create a dev branch on a commit of master.base every new feature branch on a commit of master.If you want a workflow where you can work on feature branches free of merge commits and still integrate with newer changes in master, I recommend the following: If you have not published your feature branches, you can also rebase them on the updated master: git rebase master featureA. This will create merge commits in your feature branches, though. If you want to permanently integrate new changes from master into your feature branches, you should merge master into them and go on. Branching out from a commit of master (older than the merge) won't provide you with the changes of dev. Same here, you had two parallel branches master and dev, which you merged in dev. In other words: if you merge branch A and branch B into branch C, then create a new branch on a commit of A, you won't get the changes introduced in B. If you branch from 07aeec98, you won't get the changes introduced by 8480e8ae. However, they are other commits that are needed to reach the latest dev, and these are not necessarily in the history of 07aeec98.Ĩ480e8ae (where you added bb.txt) is for example not in the history of 07aeec98. It is true that this commit is an ancestor of dev, its changes are needed to reach the latest commit in dev. I think that you might be confused by that fact that 07aeec98 is part of the branch dev. Or as other have answered, branch and checkout there in one operation: git checkout -b test

If you want to start a new branch at the location you have just checked out, you can either run branch with no start point: git branch test There is no bb.txt at this commit (according to your github repo). Second, you start a new branch on commit 07aeec98. Git branch test 07aeec983bfc17c25f0b0a7c1d47da8e35df7af8įirst, you set your HEAD to the branch dev, If you are using this form of the branch command (with start point), it does not matter where your HEAD is.

Git create branch from last commit