Re: Problems setting up bare repository (git 1.5.3.3)

[Barry Fishman <barry_fishman@acm.org>]

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

> On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Barry Fishman wrote:
>
>> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>> > Well, if the OP had used "git push <bla> master" instead of "... 
>> > master:master", it would have worked.  I am unaware of any tutorial 
>> > that suggests the latter, only of tutorials that suggest the former.
>> 
>> I did recheck the tutorials, and did not find the code I was
>> using.  So there was nothing incorrect in the documentation.
>
> Good.  Just for my curiousity: where in the documentation did you look for 
> help?  (We might want to advertise "git push <nick> <branch>" more loudly 
> there.)

I'm not sure, but I think I got the idea from:
  http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/cvs-migration.html
which does a fetch while in the bare repository rather than a push into
it:

  $ mkdir /pub/my-repo.git
  $ cd /pub/my-repo.git
  $ git --bare init --shared
  $ git --bare fetch /home/alice/myproject master:master

That series of commands works.

>> If there isn't an initial master branch, then shouldn't "git branch" be
>> able to create one.
>
> Why?  I really do not see the point in creating a branch which is named 
> different than "master", when you have nothing to begin with.

You are right, of course.  I was just following a line of thought, not
implying that creating such a branch was ever reasonable to do.

>>   This command creates an empty git repository - basically a .git directory
>>   with subdirectories for objects, refs/heads, refs/tags, and template
>>   files. An initial HEAD file references the refs/heads/master branch
>>   which is created with the first commit.
>
> How about "Your first commit will create the master branch" instead of the 
> last sentence?

Yes.  Less wobbly than how I worded it.

-- 
Barry Fishman