Re: What is the idea for bare repositories?

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> Bruno Cesar Ribas <ribas@c3sl.ufpr.br> writes:
>> 
>>> A bare repository is the way to publish your changes to the public.
>>> git-daemon  and http-clones use a bare repository that only contains
>>> adminsitrative files.
> [...]
>> 
>> Fine.  So why don't the following commands complain?  Apart from
>> git-reset without arguments (which could probably get along without a
>> working dir), they are supposed to employ a working directory.
>> 
>>> On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 02:11:58PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I have a repository declared as bare.  Some commands treat it as such,
>>>> other's don't.  For example, I get
>>>> 
>>>> git-diff [no complaint]
>>>> git-reset [no complaint]
>>>> git-reset --hard
>>>> HEAD is now at db862c1... installmanager.sh: setze GIT_WORK_TREE
>
> git-diff can compare tree and tree, or tree and index; only for
> comparing tree and files of index and files it needs working dir.

Well, if called without arguments (as above), it compares tree and
index.  So it should complain about not having a tree.  It doesn't.

> git-reset resets only refs and index. git-reset --hard resets also
> files, so it needs working directory. Perhaps it should fail
> completely and not only after doing mixed (non-hard) reset if we are
> in bare repository.

Please reread the above: it does not fail at all.  Neither before nor
after the mixed reset.

-- 
David Kastrup