If I understand correctly [*1*] what you did during this "Pull" was to get the
data from your home bare repo to your work machine for git to decode, and then
for git to feed the results back to your home working repo, so taking a full
ssh round trip (ssh encoded both ways).
That is, you maybe thought that the ssh excuted git on your home machine rather
than simply giving you file access.
"Unlike a VNC server, SSH (alone) doesn't let you drive your computer remotely"
I could well be wrong as I only use ssh for my github connection.... I was just
trying to learn the lessons.
I've split your original into chunks below so I could pick out nuances.
----- Original Message -----
From: John McKown
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 3:10 PM
Subject: [git-users] interesting? observation about "git mv" propagation
This may not be a shock to most, but it was a real surprise to me.
I have two machines. One at work. One at home.
I am using git to keep a project in sync between the two. I have a working
directory on both machines.
On my home machine, I have a separate "repository" which is on my home
machine. So I do the changes in the "working directory" (either at work or at
home) and "git push" and "git pull" to/from the repository to maintain
synchronization. It works well.
I decided that I wanted to do some renames on my work machine. I had 55 text
files which I decided I should have a ".txt" suffix on. So I did a "git mv" on
each, adding the ".txt" to the end of the file name.
I did a "git commit" after each "git mv" detailing the renaming, similar
to:"rename x to x.txt". I then did a "git push" to my repository (which did an
SSH push to my home machine). Worked fairly fast, although the "git commit" was
a bit slow.
Anyway, I then did an "ssh" onto my home machine. Did a "cd" to the working
directory and did a "git pull". Oh my word. It seemed to take forever.
I did a second ssh to get another terminal session going. I guess that I
should have known, but what actually happened was that the "git pull" deleted
all the old versions of the files from my working directory, then expanded the
compressed versions back with the new name. I guess I was expecting a simple
rename. Not a delete / restore.
OK, people "in the know" may have expected this. But it was a complete shock
to me. And I thought it might be of interest to other newbies.