[asdf-devel] Question about git

[Samium Gromoff]

From: Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info>
> On 1/27/10 Jan 27 -9:34 AM, Samium Gromoff wrote:
>> From: Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info>
>>> How are we supposed to be reasoning about the multiple git repositories
>>> out there?
>>>
>>> I have been pulling from the master/public one and then working locally.
>>>
>>> Fare works on his personal working copy.
>>>
>>> When I make a patch on mine, based on public, seems like I sometimes end
>>> up with patches that Fare can't apply cleanly to his.
>>>
>>> How are we supposed to handle this?
>> 
>> Well, there's no magic allowing to automatically compose changes that
>> were concurrently made in the same area -- you have to merge them
>> manually.
>> 
>> Why wouldn't you work off the top of the Fare's tree?
> 
> I dunno.  I guess I could.  But what's the point of having the shared
> repo then?  Why shouldn't we just have Fare's tree with one "released"
> and one "devel" branch?  Or why shouldn't Fare work on the shared repo
> directly, but on a branch?  What are we gaining, besides confusion, by
> having two repos?

I guess it's just easier for him to commit to his tree, as well as it
simplifies testing for others -- they just pull from a different repository,
not having to care about switching the branch.

Also, my suggestion was about economic sense: if you have a moving devel
branch, which is likely to go upstream, it makes sense to begin making
changes off that, rather than off something in the past -- you basically get
merging for free.

This doesn't have anything to do with one vs. two repositories -- rather,
this is pertinent to any situation with two branches -- 'release' and
'devel'.


regards,
  Samium Gromoff
--
                                 _deepfire-at-feelingofgreen.ru
O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org