From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: bare vs non-bare <1.7 then >=1.7 ? Date: Thu, 8 Nov 2012 09:59:52 -0500 Message-ID: <20121108145951.GA15560@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <509B8552.4080303@rktmb.org> <87zk2sz0mn.fsf@flaca.cmartin.tk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Mihamina Rakotomandimby , Git Issues To: Carlos Martin Nieto X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Nov 08 16:00:15 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TWTaY-0002Ng-S2 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 16:00:15 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752388Ab2KHPAA convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:00:00 -0500 Received: from 75-15-5-89.uvs.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([75.15.5.89]:36315 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751941Ab2KHPAA (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:00:00 -0500 Received: (qmail 29991 invoked by uid 107); 8 Nov 2012 15:00:46 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Thu, 08 Nov 2012 10:00:45 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 08 Nov 2012 09:59:52 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87zk2sz0mn.fsf@flaca.cmartin.tk> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 02:26:40PM +0100, Carlos Mart=C3=ADn Nieto wrot= e: > > When experimenting in order to train some colleagues, I saw that If= I > > clone a repository, I couldn't push to it because it was a non-bare > > one. > > Searchin for some explanations, I found this ressource: > > http://www.bitflop.com/document/111 > > > > It's told to be reliable information for Git < v1.7. > > > > What would be different for Git > 1.7 so that I could be up to date > > with the facts? >=20 > Bare vs. non-bare hasn't changed. The reasoning behind the two types > hasn't changed and is pretty fundamental. There is no reason for it t= o > change. Right. The key thing that changed in git v1.7 is that we started warnin= g about and denying an operation that had always been dangerous, and that is why the referenced document mentions that version. -Peff