Clone different branch git: Why You Are Probably Doing It The Hard Way

You've been there. You're staring at a massive repository on GitHub or GitLab, and you only need that one specific feature branch. Maybe it's a legacy fix. Maybe it's a experimental UI overhaul. Your first instinct is to just run git clone and wait while your computer downloads three gigabytes of history you’ll never actually touch.

Stop doing that. It’s a waste of bandwidth. It’s a waste of time.

When people search for how to clone different branch git commands, they usually just want to get to work without the bloat. Git is a powerful tool, but its default settings are surprisingly aggressive. It wants to give you everything. Every commit since 2014. Every deleted asset. Every mistake your predecessor made. But you don't need the whole family tree just to talk to one cousin.

The Single Branch Trick Everyone Forgets

The most direct way to handle this is the --single-branch flag. This is the "surgical strike" of the Git world. Instead of grabbing the entire remote tracking setup, you tell Git to focus.

Try this:
git clone -b <branch-name> --single-branch <repo-url>

Let's break down why this actually matters for your workflow. When you use the -b flag alone, Git actually still downloads the objects for every other branch. It just checks out the one you asked for once the download finishes. It's a bit of a trick. By adding --single-branch, you are explicitly telling the local configuration to only track that specific branch.

I've seen developers save literal gigabytes on large enterprise repos by using this. If you’re on a flaky coffee shop Wi-Fi or a metered connection, this isn't just a tip; it's a survival strategy.

What about depth?

If you really want to go fast, you combine that with --depth 1. This creates a "shallow clone." You get the latest snapshot of the branch. No history. No logs from five years ago. Just the code as it exists right now. It's perfect for CI/CD pipelines or quick bug checks.

👉 See also: The iPad Air 128GB 11-inch: Why This Mid-Range Tablet is Finally the "Just Right" Choice

But be careful. Shallow clones can be annoying if you suddenly realize you do need the history later. You'll have to "unshallow" the repo, which can sometimes be more headache than it's worth.

Why Does Git Make This So Confusing?

Git was designed by Linus Torvalds to be a distributed version control system. The "distributed" part is key. The philosophy is that everyone should have a full copy of the history so they can work offline and maintain the integrity of the project. It’s a beautiful, democratic idea.

It’s also incredibly annoying when you’re working on a repo that has 50,000 commits and 200 active branches.

Most modern developers don't work like they're on a 1990s mailing list. We work in Jira tickets. We work in sprints. We work in specific branches. The mismatch between Git’s "give me everything" philosophy and our "give me what I need for this ticket" reality is where the frustration starts.

Moving Between Branches After the Clone

Sometimes you've already cloned the repo. You realize the work you need is on a different remote branch that isn't showing up locally. You run git branch and only see main. It feels like you're trapped.

Don't panic.

You don't need to re-clone. You just need to fetch and track.

git fetch origin
git checkout -b <local-branch-name> origin/<remote-branch-name>

This tells your local Git: "Hey, go look at the server, find that specific branch, and create a local version of it that follows the remote version."

Honestly, many people get tripped up here because they think they need to "clone" again. You don't. You already have the underlying data (unless you used that --single-branch flag we talked about earlier). You just need to create the pointer.

The "Orphan" Branch Scenario

Here is something weird. Occasionally, you need to start a branch that has absolutely zero connection to the current history. Maybe you're starting a gh-pages branch for documentation or a completely new version of an API that shares no code with the old one.

In that case, you aren't really looking to clone different branch git styles; you're looking to create an orphan.

git checkout --orphan <new-branch-name>

This clears the index. The next commit you make will be the root commit of a totally new history. It’s a niche move, but when you need it, nothing else works.

Dealing with Submodules (The Real Headache)

If the branch you are trying to clone uses submodules, God help you.

📖 Related: Mark Zuckerberg is an asshole: What Most People Get Wrong

I’m kidding. Mostly.

But seriously, if you clone a specific branch and forget the --recurse-submodules flag, you’re going to end up with a bunch of empty folders. It’s one of the most common "why isn't my code building?" moments in junior dev history.

Always check if the project uses them. If it does, your command should look more like this:
git clone -b <branch-name> --single-branch --recurse-submodules <repo-url>

Real-World Performance: A Case Study

Let's look at a real example. Imagine a repository like the Chromium project or a massive game engine.

Total size: 25GB.
Number of branches: 1,200.

If you do a standard clone, you might be waiting three hours. If you clone different branch git with the --depth 1 and --single-branch flags, that 25GB might shrink to 500MB.

That is the difference between starting work before lunch and starting work the next morning.

Common Pitfalls to Watch Out For

1. Typing the branch name wrong: Git is case-sensitive. Feature-Branch is not the same as feature-branch. It sounds obvious, but it’s the cause of 90% of "Branch not found" errors.
2. Permissions: Just because you can see the repo doesn't mean you can see every branch. Some enterprise setups (like Bitbucket or GitLab Premium) allow for branch-level permissions. If your clone fails, check if you actually have access to that specific string.
3. Headless State: If you checkout a remote branch directly without the -b flag, you might end up in "detached HEAD" state. It sounds scary. It’s mostly just inconvenient. It means any commits you make won't belong to a branch and might get lost during garbage collection.

Actionable Next Steps

To master your workflow, start practicing these specific commands based on your current needs:

💡 You might also like: Why Half of 32 Is the Foundation of Digital Logic

• For quick code reviews: Use git clone -b <branch> --single-branch --depth 1 <url>. It’s the fastest way to get in and out.
• For long-term development: Use git clone -b <branch> <url>. You get the history you need but start exactly where you want to be.
• For existing repos: Use git fetch origin <branch>:<branch> to pull down a specific branch without messing with your current HEAD.

Stop letting Git dictate how much of your hard drive it gets to eat. Use the flags. Control the clone. Get to the code.