From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Karl =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hasselstr=F6m?= Subject: Re: Workflow question Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 03:51:46 +0200 Message-ID: <20070926015146.GA25175@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk> References: <46F93A99.5080707@gmail.com> <46F95CCC.4080209@op5.se> <46F96493.8000607@gmail.com> <20070925201717.GB19549@segfault.peff.net> <46F97618.9010207@gmail.com> <20070926004734.GA22617@segfault.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Russ Brown , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Sep 26 03:52:16 2007 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 1IaM4V-0007Pg-95 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 03:52:15 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753135AbXIZBwI convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Sep 2007 21:52:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752921AbXIZBwH (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Sep 2007 21:52:07 -0400 Received: from diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk ([80.68.90.142]:4905 "EHLO diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752897AbXIZBwG (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Sep 2007 21:52:06 -0400 Received: from kha by diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1IaM42-0006bc-00; Wed, 26 Sep 2007 02:51:46 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070926004734.GA22617@segfault.peff.net> X-Manual-Spam-Check: kha@treskal.com, clean User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 2007-09-25 20:47:34 -0400, Jeff King wrote: > Personally, I think it pays to learn a little about what's going on > under the hood, and then all of the commands Just Make Sense. > > There are several explanations floating around; this is a pretty > concise one: > > http://eagain.net/articles/git-for-computer-scientists/ I agree. Once you understand that history in git is just a DAG of commits, and that "branches" are just named pointers into this DAG to help the user remember where to attach new commits, everything starts to Just Make Sense. (And FWIW, that article was quite good as I recall.) --=20 Karl Hasselstr=F6m, kha@treskal.com www.treskal.com/kalle