From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add platform-independent .git "symlink" Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2008 00:49:36 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <8c5c35580802020959v613b9e32v321e97f93f2af761@mail.gmail.com> <1201975757-13771-1-git-send-email-hjemli@gmail.com> <47A78104.9050909@nrlssc.navy.mil> <47A78CF9.6040001@nrlssc.navy.mil> <47A79541.6070900@nrlssc.navy.mil> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Lars Hjemli , Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Brandon Casey X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Feb 05 01:51:00 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 1JMC1S-0002zv-Sa for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 05 Feb 2008 01:50:51 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757454AbYBEAuS (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 19:50:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757438AbYBEAuS (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 19:50:18 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:45411 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1757392AbYBEAuQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2008 19:50:16 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 05 Feb 2008 00:50:14 -0000 Received: from host86-138-198-40.range86-138.btcentralplus.com (EHLO [192.168.1.71]) [86.138.198.40] by mail.gmx.net (mp047) with SMTP; 05 Feb 2008 01:50:14 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+M7jlg3fWMwqMYkOw406fWtHhnVtMY9n6h3Xm6s7 QFbXG3917Fg6b9 X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <47A79541.6070900@nrlssc.navy.mil> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (LSU 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Brandon Casey wrote: > When we talk about clones we are not always talking about a strict > "full" clone. Here, sir, we disagree. I tend to like the fact that a clone is a clone is a clone. Which BTW is the reason why I do not like requests to "clone" only one branch: this is not a clone. > If your statement above is rephrased to "I _want_ the original > repository to know that it has conjoined siblings.", then we have a new > repository type: > > 4) conjoined repository (it has multiple sibling repositories each > with their own working directory, but they all share and modify the > same .git directory) No. The repository does not even need a working directory (in which case we call it "bare"). Up until now, it _can_ have _one_ working directory. With my plans, it can have more than one. Ciao, Dscho