From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Mark Levedahl" Subject: Re: Using email between 2 developers to keep git repositories in sync Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 11:00:34 -0500 Message-ID: <30e4a070801220800l6f38bbe5wc6b1ceeac7efbf06@mail.gmail.com> References: <7A02F7D1-9EB0-43AB-96F9-DDD71D4EF5FE@mac.com> <30e4a070801220635q4978fd2fvc469ca00af4e11cc@mail.gmail.com> <4F8D70B2-B264-46FF-BFBB-01AEF42DD888@mac.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: ab_lists@mac.com X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 22 17:01:58 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JHLZ0-00018W-QG for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:01:27 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756249AbYAVQAk (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jan 2008 11:00:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756293AbYAVQAj (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jan 2008 11:00:39 -0500 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.229]:38570 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753122AbYAVQAi (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jan 2008 11:00:38 -0500 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id c49so876195wra.1 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 08:00:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=YS4w8xR0/f6qgpAzU1yfXTR5FUKZsg0lou/Rm4I5/RY=; b=TToJ0EoOi9kjqxraRnuK/VH8s8DiHJdMzKYmTv7+Pm2lMNJT53J976EQPzFSaTDeMVdc8bnrnf9ZNjcdCAn9M/ML/6poAOWQCnparaj/lfw2cR0JRYEChnYofbsYYTes+XznjpZ4ZGaiH1B2gEVrbIUwphX3vvN8GWTcm692fO8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=rRlr3y+KkwhLiUfVbjf74/2syPcxBUmeOEZQapa7nvVNZYDWOy3zzWDmU5jBUsbh0R7SuFpeeFNLm0Ra0wq6rsTaxw4sWAjeavQMPDofHiDS8fFNSPqT7KNQfwUPD6bawhC3lX2GmOTO35jDa6tksKo0rgfc6iZrc4B5SJ00FzI= Received: by 10.142.48.14 with SMTP id v14mr4129101wfv.133.1201017634538; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 08:00:34 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.143.15.6 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Jan 2008 08:00:34 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4F8D70B2-B264-46FF-BFBB-01AEF42DD888@mac.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Jan 22, 2008 10:05 AM, wrote: > Thank you all for your feedback! > > So would it be wise to synchronise the repositories over time using > the bundles and despite having exchanged email patches or should they > be used separately? > You can use both: patches to distribute proposed changes, bundles to distribute the integrated (and presumably controlled) branches after changes are accepted. Of course, you can use a bundle to distribute a proposed change as well (as a topic branch), you have to decide for yourselves what works best. Patches are great for distributed review over a mailing list, but if only a couple of you and no mailing list that advantage diminishes. Mark