Re: [PATCH] gitweb: Document that gitweb deals with bare repositories

On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Jakub Narebski [off-list ref] wrote:

Gitweb can deal with non-bare repositories. It is only that because
gitweb is not interested in working area, it shows $GIT_DIR (path to
repository itself) as name/path to repository. Therefore repo/.git
for non-bare repositories, because it is repository itself that matters.

I understand that, but why does gitweb have to punish me because I
give it more than it cares about?

If you provide access for others, i.e. if those repositories shown in
gitweb are public repositories, it is much better to use bare
repositories for that.

Why?  What difference does it make if they clone directly from my
working tree, instead of some shadow repository?

-- 
Timur Tabi
Linux kernel developer at Freescale