From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Baudis Subject: Re: Re: Add "clone" support to lntree Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 01:00:00 +0200 Message-ID: <20050416230000.GN19099@pasky.ji.cz> References: <20050416024755.GX7417@pasky.ji.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Apr 17 00:56:49 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DMwDH-0001dc-2p for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 17 Apr 2005 00:56:31 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261183AbVDPXAJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Apr 2005 19:00:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261184AbVDPXAI (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Apr 2005 19:00:08 -0400 Received: from w241.dkm.cz ([62.24.88.241]:44422 "HELO machine.sinus.cz") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261183AbVDPXAB (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Apr 2005 19:00:01 -0400 Received: (qmail 11330 invoked by uid 2001); 16 Apr 2005 23:00:00 -0000 To: Daniel Barkalow Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-message-flag: Outlook : A program to spread viri, but it can do mail too. Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Dear diary, on Sat, Apr 16, 2005 at 05:06:54AM CEST, I got a letter where Daniel Barkalow told me that... > On Sat, 16 Apr 2005, Petr Baudis wrote: > > I'm sorry but you are late, I added it about a hour and half ago or so. > > :-) Check git fork. (I *want* separate command than git lntree. In fact, > > I think I should make git lntree gitXlntree.sh instead, since it is > > really internal command for git-tools and the user should probably never > > need it for anything. git lntree is too lowlevel.) > > Have you not pushed since? I don't see it. See my last mail. :-) > I think "fork" is as good as anything for describing the operation. I had > thought about "clone" because it seemed to fill the role that "bk > clone" had (although I never used BK, so I'm not sure). It doesn't seem > useful to me to try cloning multiple remote repositories, since you'd get > a copy of anything common from each; you just want to suck everything into > the same .git/objects and split off working directories. Actually, what about if git pull outside of repository did what git clone does now? I'd kinda like clone instead of fork too. -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ C++: an octopus made by nailing extra legs onto a dog. -- Steve Taylor