[asdf-devel] Question about git

[Robert Goldman]

On 1/27/10 Jan 27 -3:36 PM, Samium Gromoff wrote:
> 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.

I guess I still don't get it.  So now I have to have either two or three
remotes, right?  The canonical public repo, Fare's public repo, and
possibly my own public repo, if I want to publish my own current state.

This seems like a Babel of states for me to track.  What's the standard
practice here?

I bet there's a sort of standard operating procedure for doing this kind
of thing, but I'm not sure what that procedure is.

thanks,
r