Hello Gitsers,
I'm a Git newbee, and I have started a project, with a few month's of code
in
a local git repository.
I am the only develloper/contributor to this repo. I have a clone of my
repository
on a USB key, for back up purposes. Once in a while I work on another
machine
where I have cloned a repo from the USB key.
Since there are no servers involved, I have used pull command
to move my 'HEAD' around :
after working on machine1 I do :
commit to machine1Repo
machine1Repo --pull--> USBKeyRepo
when I switch on machine2 I start by bringing it up to date from the key :
machine2Repo <--pull-- USBKeyRepo
and when I'm finished :
commit to machine2Repo
machine1Repo --pull--> USBKeyRepo
So far I have done all of this using the master branch,
and things don'g always go smoothly I sometimes have
conflicts that don't seem logical, since I'm the only
contrbutor, I should never need to do merges.
From what I have read my USBKey repo is like a public repo,
so I have tried using a bare repo, because since I never work
directly on the usb key, the souces on this repo are just
adding unnecessary complexity. So far I had no success,
because the pull command doesn't recognize my bare repo,
it seems that bare repos must me accessed via a daemon process.
I suspect that I'm probably not using Git correctly (or optimally),
which is why I am inquiring here.
Should I be using a dedicated branch
on each machine (as if I were two contributors) ?
Is it wise to use pulls instead of pushes ?
Should I be using a bare repo on my key ?
Any insight would be appreciated.
Thank you all
Hi,
2010/1/24 Maxime Lévesque [off-list ref]:
Since there are no servers involved, I have used pull command
to move my 'HEAD' around :
after working on machine1 I do :
commit to machine1Repo
machine1Repo --pull--> USBKeyRepo
I think you mean "push", since what you want is to make the changes in
machine1Repo available in USBKeyRepo.
when I switch on machine2 I start by bringing it up to date from the key :
machine2Repo <--pull-- USBKeyRepo
and when I'm finished :
commit to machine2Repo
machine1Repo --pull--> USBKeyRepo
I think you mean "push" here and s/machine1/machine2/ too, so that would read
machine2Repo --push--> USBKeyRepo
When you make changes on machine2 and go back to machine1, you need to
fetch/pull in your changes, just like you do for machine2Repo:
machine1Repo <--pull-- USBKeyRepo
From what I have read my USBKey repo is like a public repo,
so I have tried using a bare repo, because since I never work
directly on the usb key, the souces on this repo are just
adding unnecessary complexity. So far I had no success,
because the pull command doesn't recognize my bare repo,
it seems that bare repos must me accessed via a daemon process.
What's your config?
Assuming you use master everywhere, I think you could use this in your config:
[remote "USBKeyRepo"]
url = /path/to/repo
fetch = master
[branch "master"]
remote = USBKeyRepo
merge = master
Is it wise to use pulls instead of pushes ?
See above. You can't use one "instead of" another - they serve
different purposes and don't replace one another.
Should I be using a bare repo on my key ?
Definitely, or else you would have a working tree in that repo too but
it never gets updated - not to mention all the warnings git would
show.
--
Cheers,
Ray Chuan
El 24/01/2010, a las 03:17, Tay Ray Chuan escribió:
Hi,
2010/1/24 Maxime Lévesque [off-list ref]:
quoted
Since there are no servers involved, I have used pull command
to move my 'HEAD' around :
after working on machine1 I do :
commit to machine1Repo
machine1Repo --pull--> USBKeyRepo
I think you mean "push", since what you want is to make the changes in
machine1Repo available in USBKeyRepo.
quoted
when I switch on machine2 I start by bringing it up to date from
the key :
machine2Repo <--pull-- USBKeyRepo
and when I'm finished :
commit to machine2Repo
machine1Repo --pull--> USBKeyRepo
I think you mean "push" here and s/machine1/machine2/ too, so that
would read
machine2Repo --push--> USBKeyRepo
When you make changes on machine2 and go back to machine1, you need to
fetch/pull in your changes, just like you do for machine2Repo:
machine1Repo <--pull-- USBKeyRepo
quoted
From what I have read my USBKey repo is like a public repo,
so I have tried using a bare repo, because since I never work
directly on the usb key, the souces on this repo are just
adding unnecessary complexity. So far I had no success,
because the pull command doesn't recognize my bare repo,
it seems that bare repos must me accessed via a daemon process.
For this kind of workflow I generally use pull in both directions.
Push works only if it results in fast-forward merges in both
directions, and if you are a little forgetful like me it's fairly easy
to sooner or later forget to update one of the repos and end up making
commits in both of them, leading to a situation in which at least one
of the merges would have to be a non-fast-forward.
If you always pull, you are at least working in a non-bare repo at
that point and you can choose to either (non-fast-forward) merge or
rebase.
Unless you are really disciplined about synchronizing the repos before
you ever start any work, then I think "pull" in both directions is the
way to go.
Cheers,
Wincent