[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: CM 1.1 git question
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
Re: CM 1.1 git question |
Date: |
Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:16:48 +0800 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 05:53:06PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > 1. git-clone gets the entire repo, not just the particular
> > branch that you want.
>
> Indeed, but as Git is pretty efficient, simplicity beats correctness here.
What if a newbie wants to fix some typos in the English docs, work
on translations, and possibly translate the website? That's three
branches.
> > 2. We don't want newbies switching between branches, because
> > (speaking from experience) that wastes 1-5 hours of frustrating
> > time-wasting when you're just trying to work on lilypond.
>
> I agree. Before you understand the ways branches can split at a common
> commit and come together again at a merge commit (and all kinds of weird
> criss-cross merge scenarios), this is more than just confusing.
Yes.
Given my understanding of the situation, the current system (where
users copy&paste 4 or 5 lines of totally cryptic commands and
possibly see some warning messages, but end up with a working
setup) is the best for people working on individual branches in
individual directories. People understand directories. :)
I'm totally open to changing these cut&paste command blocks, but
I'm not certain that git clone is the best way to go, especially
for the case of a translator who notices typos. git clone may be
efficient, but efficient enough to store three separate clones of
the same repo? Especially when one (the web/ branch) is a tiny
fraction of the sizes of the other two (master/ and
lilypond/translate/ ).
Cheers,
- Graham
- Re: CM 1.1 git question, (continued)
- Re: CM 1.1 git question, Graham Percival, 2009/02/20
- Re: CM 1.1 git question, Graham Percival, 2009/02/20
- Re: CM 1.1 git question, Jonathan Kulp, 2009/02/20
- Re: CM 1.1 git question, Trevor Daniels, 2009/02/20
- Re: CM 1.1 git question, Jonathan Kulp, 2009/02/20
- Re: CM 1.1 git question, Jonathan Kulp, 2009/02/19
- Re: CM 1.1 git question, Carl D. Sorensen, 2009/02/19
- Re: CM 1.1 git question, Jonathan Kulp, 2009/02/18
- Re: CM 1.1 git question, Johannes Schindelin, 2009/02/18
Re: CM 1.1 git question, Johannes Schindelin, 2009/02/17