Almost getting there! Couple more questions for clarification:
Why is it more secure to force all changes through an intermediate
repository? Or maybe I'm confused on how to force all changes through
an intermediate repositoryHere's the 3 scenarios I'm imagining,
please correct me where I'm w
Oh, I didn't spot the difference there. Hmm. Well, you can have an
intermediate intermediate repository if you want. This is a nice place for
sharing branches and stuff between developers. If you have it push onward to
the webserver automatically or if you have the developers push themselves..
Thanks again, Thomas. Would you suggest having the intermediate
server (Model 1), as opposed to just using the webserver (Model 2), or
vice-versa?
If you do suggest having the intermediate server, can you explain more
about "cloning around the repository"? Also, in that case, would I
push from m
Yes, if it's two different websites, there's no point in them sharing a
repository. Have two repositories: website-us and website-uk.
There's nothing wrong with having more machines involved, of course. You can
clone around the repository as many times as you want.
But before a developer in Haw
Thanks for the help Thomas! I can't wait to become a full-fledged Git
user. Unfortunately, I seem to have left out some finer details,
which I need further guidance on.
First off, the UK website is not the same as the US website, it's two
different code bases, but I suppose I can just replicate w
Hi Carey, welcome to the wonderful world of Git ;)
So, you've got some server machines:
* UK machine
* US machine
* local machine
You've got basically one repo called "website". This repository will get
cloned across each of these three machines.
Now don't confuse these repositories with the
