Darren Hart <darren.hart@...>
On 04/27/2011 02:03 PM, Richard Purdie wrote:
On Wed, 2011-04-27 at 10:20 -0700, Elizabeth Flanagan wrote:I'm curious how many people reading this feel this is "basic git". AnyoneA few notes, since I talked with Darren about this earlier.
willing to admit this was the first time they have seen a targeted branch
fetch used to avoid a larger download? If everyone is comfortable with this,
fine. If not, we should consider the impact of this type of access on our
My biggest complaint with this is the lack of self discovery from within gitgit remote add poky-contrib ssh://git@.../poky-contrib.git
without doing a git remote update. Unless tomz is online at the time to tell me
it's tomz/foo-bar, not tomz/foo_bar, then I have to go load the web browser and
check which branches are available, or resort to downloading all the objects.
I confess though, it still just feels wrong to keep unrelated source trees in
the same repository.
Just to add to this discussion, with gitolite, it should be easy to
I don't understand wanting to keep multiple distinct source trees in a single
git repositorie. If you have two different layers in there, each in its own
branch, then you can only work with one of them at a time. The end-user then has
to have multiple clones of the same repository in order to work with their two
layers. And they will end up naming them something like:
And keep them checked out to the appropriate set of branches... that seems like
a lot of pain to impose on users to avoid setting up personal git repositories.
Personally, I think I would revert to my kernel.org repositories rather than try
and make this work.
Or - is my git-fu weak? Is there a better way to handle the above?
Intel Open Source Technology Center
Yocto Project - Linux Kernel