If you have direct write access to a repo then git clone
is the fast lane. If you do not have write access or you prefer a safety net on the server then fork the project on the hosting service and work from your fork. Both are valid in a modern git workflow and both keep the version control gods happy when used correctly.
Cloning makes a local copy of the repository and links it to the original remote. Use git clone owner/repo.git
when you are experimenting locally or when you already have permission to push to the upstream project. Cloning is quick and direct which is great for teams with shared write access.
Forking creates a server side copy under your account on GitHub or another host. This is your sandbox. Fork when you do not have write permission or when you want to keep the original repo safe from stray pushes. Forks make pull requests explicit which is the standard for open source contributing.
git clone myaccount/repo.git
git push origin feature-branch
Do not let your fork rot. Add the original as an upstream remote and pull changes regularly. You can merge or rebase depending on your team's preference.
git remote add upstream original_owner/repo.git
git fetch upstream
git checkout main
git merge upstream/main
If you prefer a cleaner history use rebase instead of merge. That keeps commits tidy before opening a pull request.
In short pick the tool that matches your permissions and your level of caution. Fork when you want a server side sandbox and clean PRs. Clone when you have write access and you want to work directly. Now go contribute and try not to break production while doing it.
I know how you can get Azure Certified, Google Cloud Certified and AWS Certified. It's a cool certification exam simulator site called certificationexams.pro. Check it out, and tell them Cameron sent ya!
This is a dedicated watch page for a single video.