From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Workflow question Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 14:28:22 -0700 Message-ID: <7vabra5tah.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <46F93A99.5080707@gmail.com> <46F95CCC.4080209@op5.se> <46F96493.8000607@gmail.com> <20070925201717.GB19549@segfault.peff.net> <46F97618.9010207@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org To: Russ Brown X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Sep 25 23:28:40 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 1IaHxO-0001UF-Vm for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 23:28:39 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754863AbXIYV2a (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Sep 2007 17:28:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754466AbXIYV2a (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Sep 2007 17:28:30 -0400 Received: from rune.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.210.124.37]:36629 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753078AbXIYV23 (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Sep 2007 17:28:29 -0400 Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by rune.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 119D113BCE8; Tue, 25 Sep 2007 17:28:46 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <46F97618.9010207@gmail.com> (Russ Brown's message of "Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:56:56 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Russ Brown writes: > I keep reading things similar to this and bit by bit I'm starting to get > it. :) I suppose this is one case in which it's definitely a > disadvantage to have a good understanding of svn before coming to git... > > You must unlearn what you have learned You do not have to unlearn; if Jeff truly unlearned he wouldn't have spotted you were trapped in SVN mentality. You just need to learn there could be other ways ;-). > If you delete a branch that has commits on it that aren't referenced by > any other branches, will those commits be removed by something like git > pack or git gc? Yes, eventually. > I suppose what has me the most confused is how a developer works with a > remote branch: I've come to understand that a developer should never > check out and work on a remote branch, and always create a local one and > work on that. If he does that using the above hierarchy, there then > becomes main->projectX->featureY->jeff_local_branch_of_featureY. Or is > is possible for a developer to work directory on a remote branch? The statement in the last sentence does not make any sense. Remote is called remote because it is remote and supposed to be out of reach ;-) More seriously, remotes are used as reference points so if you "work directly on them", you cannot use them as reference points any more; you defeat the sole purpose of existence of remotes. You can work _without_ using remote tracking branches, but that is mostly for merge based workflow. It appears that you are leaning towards rebase-heavy workflow, so I do not think it is applicable to your project.