From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: RE: git pull on Linux/ACPI release tree Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 15:07:45 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: <20060109225143.60520.qmail@web31807.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: "Brown, Len" , "Luck, Tony" , Junio C Hamano , Martin Langhoff , "David S. Miller" , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, akpm@osdl.org, git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jan 10 00:09:36 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ew68t-00058F-7E for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 10 Jan 2006 00:09:35 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750790AbWAIXJb (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2006 18:09:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750768AbWAIXJb (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2006 18:09:31 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:1457 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750766AbWAIXJa (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jan 2006 18:09:30 -0500 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k09N7lDZ001929 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Mon, 9 Jan 2006 15:07:47 -0800 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k09N7jGq028120; Mon, 9 Jan 2006 15:07:45 -0800 To: Luben Tuikov In-Reply-To: <20060109225143.60520.qmail@web31807.mail.mud.yahoo.com> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.64__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.129 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Luben Tuikov wrote: > > Yes. Ever since I started used git, I never used branch > switching, but I do have git branches and I do use git branching. > > I basically have a branch per directory, whereby the object db > is shared as is remotes/refs/etc, HEAD and index are not shared > of course. > > This allows me to do a simple and fast "cd" to change/go to a > different branch, since they are in different directories. > So the time I wait to switch branches is the time the filesystem > takes to do a "cd". > > This also allows me to build/test/patch/work on branches > simultaneously. Yes. It has many advantages, and it's the approach I pushed pretty hard originally, but the "many branches in the same tree" approach seems to have become the more common one. Using many branches in the same tree is definitely the better approach for _distribution_, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's the better one for development. For example, you can have a git distribution tree with 20 different branches on kernel.org, but do development in 20 different trees with just one branch active - and when you do a "git push" to push out your branch in your development tree, it just updates that one branch on the distribution site. So git certainly supports that kind of behaviour, but nobody I know actually does it that way (not even me, but since I tend to just merge other peoples code, I don't actually have multiple branches: I create temporary branches for one-off things, but don't maintain them that way). Linus