Resolving "No Tracking Information" Errors in Git Branches

The Evolution of Tracking Branches

Tracking branches between remote and local repositories is core Git functionality today, but this was not always the case. Understanding the history of branch tracking can provide helpful context.

Before Branch Tracking Existed

In early versions of Git, remote "tracking" was managed through manual configuration of the remote branch name to integrate changes between repositories:

[branch "master"]
  remote = origin
  merge = refs/heads/master 

This required explicit mappings for every branch which did not scale well.

The Introduction of Tracking Branches

Git 1.5 introduced dedicated tracking branches and git pull capabilities:

git checkout --track origin/serverfix

This automatically created a local "serverfix" branch tracking the remote branch.

Today, git branch -u accomplishes the same thing:

git branch -u origin/serverfix serverfix

Evolution of git fetch and git pull Tracking Behavior

Earlier versions of Git focused mainly on git push tracking behavior. Over time, capabilities evolved to better facilitate git pull operations:

Year	Tracking Branch Milestone
2014	fetch first, then merge tracking branches introduced
2015	–no-track option for one off fetching branches
2016	fetching tags from remote tracking branches

So modern Git‘s entire pull-push workflow relies deeply on branch tracking history and ancestry between repositories.

Advanced Branch Tracking Scenarios

Branch tracking also comes into play in more complex collaborative workflows like:

Tracking Branches in Forked Repositories

Fork-and-PR workflows require careful attention to tracking branches between forks and upstream:

Branches must be correctly mapped locally, remotely, and upstream.

Dealing with Branch Namespace Collisions

If developers on different teams work on local branches of the same name, non-obvious difficulties can emerge when pushing and pulling due to ambiguities in tracking. Strategies like including team names in branch prefixes help avoid such scenarios.

For example team A works in feature/new-module branch while team B works in new-module branch of the same project repository. This causes confusion tracking the appropriate upstream branch.

Recursive Submodule Branch Tracking

When using Git submodules, subproject branches can track both the parent repo branches and submodule upstream branches:

This adds further complexity to managing branch tracking lifecycles.

Tips and Best Practices

1. Use Branch Namespacing Conventions

Encapsulate semantic information in branch names like issue numbers, categories, team names, or dates to better track branch purpose at a glance. For example:

feature/new-module-Aug2022
bugfix/server-compat-#3426
client-iOS/main

2. Limit Local Branches

Avoid accumulating excessive outdated local branches. Prune old branches after pull requests merge or features release.

3. Leverage Remote Tracking References

Remote references like origin/main act as read-only local manifestations of remote branches, providing tracking visibility even if a diverged local branch exists.

4. Agree on Shared Branch Models

Document agreed conventions between teams for naming prefixes, main vs master, prefix vs postfix etc. to avoid ambiguity when pushing/pulling branches between local and remote repositories.

Alternatives and Complementary Techniques

Rebase Instead of Merge

Employing git rebase rather than git merge for integrating remote changes provides a linear project history. This can simplify tracking branches since cleanup old merge commits. However, rebasing has some downsides like lost context.

Managing Lost Branches with git reflog

The git reflog records local repository snapshots for all activity beyond traditional commits and branch history. So git reflog show main can retrieve "lost" local main branch commits that were not pushed or tracked properly via other means.

Low-tech Workaround: Multiple Clone Repositories

In small teams without extensive branching needs, simply cloning separate copies of repositories for each member provides isolation. Individuals can then manually reconcile changes between peer clones. This avoids tracking intricacies entirely.

Conclusion

Tracking branches is now deeply infused in Git workflows – but this reflects years of accumulating functionality. Understanding this history along with techniques for adapting branch tracking to specialized contexts can help developers become more proficient with leveraging branches for collaboration and coordination. Keeping up with the growing sophistication of distributed version control requires an appreciation for its past evolution as well as its future directions.