Re: [git-users] git reset changes something?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Il 25/12/2012 11:24, Konstantin Khomoutov ha scritto: On Mon, 24 Dec 2012 09:51:19 -0800 (PST) Javier Garcia tirengar...@gmail.com wrote: in the man of git reset it says: * git-reset - Reset current HEAD to the specified state* [...] 1. http://git-scm.com/2011/07/11/reset.html By the way: I have tried to search the git-scm.com blog archive index, but without success. The search form is not helping: http://git-scm.com/search/results?search=Reset%20Demystified returns Sorry, no search matches Searching with google, it seems that Reset Demustified is the only article available; is this true? Thanks Manlio -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlDa32AACgkQscQJ24LbaUSlpwCfQ49XXeryjcy99yXEz99pQncL SEcAn0UvR2WNLc2NHw+1Tjk/uzNLCYK2 =riB5 -END PGP SIGNATURE- --
Re: [git-users] Keep local repo small
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Il 23/12/2012 21:57, Francesco Rugiano ha scritto: Hello I have a question and i didn't manage to get an answer. I am in this situation: Remote repository - hosted on bitbucket Local repository on PC1 - managed by Git 1.8.0 (on Windows 7) Local repository on PC2 - managed by Git 1.8.0 (on Windows 7) [...] Now, in order to keep the local repositories small, i wanted to remove committs A, B and C. I wanted, however, to keep them on the remote repository, in order to be able to revert to them in the future. Is really size a big problem? You can try with git gc --aggressive. You can also try with git clone --depth=1 remote-repository, but read the manual page carefully. If you want full history again, you can just git clone remore-repository. However I would *never* keep my only full history repository on an external hosting. I had to do this with subversion, in the past... [...] Regards Manlio -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlDYbz8ACgkQscQJ24LbaURx9ACePrjxqCDh2EzyOe5rpp9GWYxA lKEAnjo/SBVFGYvRx0imY7Md8wN2K5BU =CkwR -END PGP SIGNATURE- --
Re: [git-users] Re: git.for solo developer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Il 22/12/2012 07:33, Dimitris Papageorgiou ha scritto: Ok...I have quite understand what Git is an how it will help me. The question is, since Netbeans has a history feature about each file in a project which helps undo changes, what more Git has to offer than this and in general any VCS out here. That a VCS store a snapshot of your file (Mercorial) or your entire working tree (Git) at every commit. And of course, you can diff between different versions of a file, check when and how some code was moved from one file to another (Git), and check when and how any single line of a file was added (Mercurial and Git blame command). My question might seem naive but I am gust trying to fully understand the concept of Version control system. As I wrote: read the Git and Mercurial books. They have all the answers you want. Regards Manlio -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlDVxvgACgkQscQJ24LbaUTjewCeLUKiCX/gcKJ6pdndWW/P3INm MxoAnjjDEEe5igYtS8GLVsfJR4BXTpKu =3L0y -END PGP SIGNATURE- --
Re: [git-users] git.for solo developer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Il 19/12/2012 21:30, Dimitris Papageorgiou ha scritto: Do you think git would be useful for a solo developer as I am right now? Of course. I am developing a web app alone-no other developers. VCS is always useful kind of aid for a developer. But I think Git is intended more for teams of developers that wotk on the same project so that they can take advantage of Git's distributed functionality. I am asking these things because I am complete beginner in Git and in general to version control systems I'm in the same situation. In the past I used Subversion, then Mercurial and now I'm starting to use Git. First of all, a DVCS is much more flexible, compared to traditional VCS. Just think about the case when you develop some common code in a separate library, and you want to release it under an open source license. With a DVCS sharing it is not a problem. In the past there was not even support for mirroring a Subversion repository... Another useful feature of git (and mercurial) is the ability to amend a commit (and I use it a lot!). Compared to Mercurial one critical benefit of Git is easy branch support. I suggest you to read the Pro Git book, and compare it with the Mercurial book and the Subversion book (all available free online and as a PDF). Working in topic branches really change your way of working. With Mercurial usually I ended up in chaos, when I was working on multiple things at once. Regards Manlio -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlDSRnsACgkQscQJ24LbaUT69ACcCdoVshpLxQFWNBi6K2slRq9L qNUAni2GgTsjSAUMMm3KcVC2oP/fF6gM =8rel -END PGP SIGNATURE- --
Re: [git-users] Re: interesting? observation about git mv propagation
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Il 13/12/2012 18:58, John McKown ha scritto: I guess I wasn't clear. 1) on work machine, do git mv on 55 files. This is fairly fast. 2) on work machine, do git push to the repository. This pushes the data to the repository on my home machine via ssh. This went quickly 3) on work machine, use ssh to bring up a Linux terminal session at home. 4) on home machine, do a git pull to pull from the repository on my home machine. This went slowly. From watching what was happening by using a second terminal session on my home machine, I noticed that all 55 of the existing files were deleted. Then all 55 were uncompressed/restored from the repository (on the home machine). And these 55 files total up to 13 gig. Each is about 2-3 meg, except for one which is 1.4 gig. Home machine is a Core i7 running 2.66Ghz. Git, as explained in the documentation, does not track files renaming. However it knows that in your case they are the same: this is the reason why the push was fast; your home repo already have the objects with the same SHA. pull is slow because git has to unpack them; and yes, probably git could be a bit more smart and check if an object with the same name/file mode/SHA already exists in the working directory, bit I'm not sure. Regards Manlio -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAlDMqWgACgkQscQJ24LbaUTH6ACfSqznex2Kvs19LySdt+25livq iWIAniJJO+TzJlDs+lWmsRu78ALsLKkh =29IX -END PGP SIGNATURE- --
