From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Russell Subject: Suggestions for my use case Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2006 22:41:23 +0800 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Sep 02 16:41:38 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 1GJWgd-0004wY-NQ for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 02 Sep 2006 16:41:32 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750856AbWIBOlZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Sep 2006 10:41:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750863AbWIBOlZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Sep 2006 10:41:25 -0400 Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.180]:45090 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750846AbWIBOlY (ORCPT ); Sat, 2 Sep 2006 10:41:24 -0400 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id n25so1774131pyg for ; Sat, 02 Sep 2006 07:41:23 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=aR7tVRj3xGu6E0cEgOQHX+zkHfZ86NfvOA1wViXoSDpeNtmDxgIGVIq4uj3mriBQQlpeslZO1rxKQAHHK0NuX7yCwve7+Ht0yAvNcXm8GEivG9lPTTaOmfWoTAr9u9nTXb+KU9q36UtmYoRphgM5EBXhuJJLjHRXySth4TzI0ng= Received: by 10.35.36.13 with SMTP id o13mr5518683pyj; Sat, 02 Sep 2006 07:41:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.35.92.20 with HTTP; Sat, 2 Sep 2006 07:41:23 -0700 (PDT) To: git@vger.kernel.org Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hello, I've been tring git for a few private projects and have come up with a way to organise distributed development on multiple machines. I was wondering if anyone else could comment on what I've done? Here it is... I want to be able to work on a project called proj on multiple computers, and have backups on removable media. Let's say I have computers c1 and c2, and a removable hard disk labelled disk1. I've setup the repositories in c1: /home/me/proj c2: /home/me/proj disk1: /media/disk1/me/proj In c1:/home/me/proj/.git/remotes/c2 URL: ssh://c2/home/me/proj Pull: refs/heads/master:refs/heads/host/c2 Push: refs/heads/master:refs/heads/host/c1 In c1:/home/me/proj/.git/remotes/disk1 URL: /media/disk1/me/proj Pull: refs/heads/master:refs/heads/disk/disk1 Push: refs/heads/master:refs/heads/host/c1 In c2:/home/me/proj/.git/remotes/c1 URL: ssh://c1/home/me/proj Pull: refs/heads/master:refs/heads/host/c1 Push: refs/heads/master:refs/heads/host/c2 In c2:/home/me/proj/.git/remotes/disk1 URL: /media/disk1/me/proj Pull: refs/heads/master:refs/heads/disk/disk1 Push: refs/heads/master:refs/heads/host/c2 c1 has these branches: master host/c2 disk/disk1 c2 has these branches: master host/c1 disk/disk1 disk1 has these branches: master host/c1 host/c2 So after doing some work at c1 and committing into master, I can c1$ git-push c2 c1$ git-push disk1 Then when I sit down at c2: c2$ git-pull . host/c1 Or if I've forgotten to push from c1: c2$ git-pull c1 Or I can cart disk1 around, and c2$ git-pull disk1 Each repository stays on its master branch. As per the git-pull man page, no development is done on branches that I pull from. This is working fine for me at the moment, which is single person development, straight line, no branching. When I come to branches, I think the branches will need to be added in each repository, with push and pull lines in .git/remotes/c1 etc. Does this look reasonable? What have I missed that would make this more manageable, particularly with respect to branching? -- VGER BF report: U 0.500329