Re: Git BOF notes

Hi,

On Sat, 22 Jul 2006, Petr Baudis wrote:

  Hi,

Dear diary, on Sat, Jul 22, 2006 at 02:17:48AM CEST, I got a letter
where Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] said that...

quoted

On Fri, 21 Jul 2006, Petr Baudis wrote:

quoted

Yes, there is some blury stuff, but I think it's rather a sign that
something is missing in the core Git porcelain. git-init-db is lowlevel
and I think in 99% of the cases you are going to do an initial commit
right after anyway, so you might as well just get git-init which does it
for you (something akin cg-init ;).

Think "changed templates".

  it may be that I'm just tired, but I don't see what you mean, sorry.

If you change a template (like add a hook or something), you can call 
git-init-db in an existing repository to update that hook.

quoted

And also think "setup a remote repository", especially "setup a remote
HTTP repository".

  Of course. Currently you need to tinker with environment variables,
then with hooks, possibly with permissions and stuff to make the
repository shared... Think cg-admin-setuprepo. ;-)

git-init-db --shared

quoted

And also think "start a new repository with only a _part_ of the current 
files". There are plenty reasons -- in addition to separation of concepts 
-- not to commit straight after initializing a repository.

  So what _do_ you do if you don't commit straight?

Sometimes, I do "git-push just@initted.repository.com master". From 
somewhere else, of course.

At other times, I do "git-add the-paper.tex && git commit initial".

And sometimes, I do "cp -R /some/where/CVS ./; git-cvsimport".

  Of course sometimes you don't want to add everything, and that should
still be possible to do (cg-init has a switch for that).

Usually I start small projects as a single .c or .java file. Only after a 
while, I think it is worth it to init a git database. So, I _always_ have 
generated files lying around. And I would hate it if they were checked in 
automatically. (Yeah, I could remove them, _then_ remove them from the 
index, and then git-commit --amend. Ugly.)

quoted

quoted

I think we still tell users to use git-update-index to mark resolved 
conflicts, [...]

I don't know, but I had the impression we'd tell them "resolve your 
conflicts, and then do git-commit -a". Which is good enough.

  My comment there was based on the jdl's presentation at OLS. Sorry if
in docs we are saying other things, I don't tend to lookat Git porcelain
documentation. ;-)

That makes two of us.

Ciao,
Dscho