Well, I don't see the point of people downloading the code to their
*local* windows machine when they can edit files and working directly
into the development server through the network, I said mount but I
wanted to say network drive.
Does anyone have clue why git is behaving this odd? I'm really
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
I used git to sync all my stuff across multiple computers
as well as my cell phone. Currently, I have a git repo roughly
4G in size (the size of the .git folder), synchronizing between
computers are reasonablely fast, but I found syncing with
my cell phone via a USB cable is awfully
I think the reason that git is behaving oddly is because you are not
using it the way it was intended to be used. Git is intended to have a
copy of the code on each machine that is running it.
That being said, I'm not aware of any CVS system that doesn't require
that code be kept
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
On 04/21/2011 05:49 PM, Thomas Ferris Nicolaisen wrote:
Of course it scales up pretty well dealing with binary files as well,
but it's not meant to be a syncing-mechanism for mobile devices, so
once you start running into problems like this, it could very well be
that it's beyond the purpose
Thanks again, Thomas. Would you suggest having the intermediate
server (Model 1), as opposed to just using the webserver (Model 2), or
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 my
If it's only for backup or transport purposes, you could still rsync the
repository to your mobile. Making it a bare repository would reduce the size
of stuff to be rsynced.
I'm not familiar with the internals http://progit.org/book/ch9-6.html of a
git push or pull, but there is a lot of
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..
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
Mail list logo