From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: State of the repository conversion Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:17:02 +0200 Message-ID: <83mwgj6eld.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20140319175124.BCCB3380835@snark.thyrsus.com> <87bnx1ricb.fsf@igel.home> <83ob118r76.fsf@gnu.org> <8361n896es.fsf@gnu.org> <878us44mcs.fsf@dod.no> <83ob0z6hs9.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1395397609 31134 80.91.229.3 (21 Mar 2014 10:26:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:26:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Steinar Bang Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 21 11:26:57 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WQwfA-0005nI-VV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 11:26:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51859 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WQwfA-0002T3-Gm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:26:56 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55378) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WQwVR-0003yZ-Ti for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:16:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WQwVM-0000d4-4C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:16:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout25.012.net.il ([80.179.55.181]:44049) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WQwVL-0000cz-SS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 06:16:48 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout25.012.net.il by mtaout25.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0N2S008006PNFE00@mtaout25.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:15:20 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by mtaout25.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0N2S0028875KTF80@mtaout25.012.net.il>; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 12:15:20 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.181 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:170701 Archived-At: > From: Steinar Bang > Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 10:53:18 +0100 > > >>>>> Eli Zaretskii : > > > Thanks. However, I cannot easily map this arrangement to what I had > > in mind, namely, having a separate trunk and release branches, each > > one having its working tree in a different directory. What am I > > missing? > > Ok, so you want separate working directories of the official master and > release branches? Right. > I have satisfied this requirement for myself, by simply having separate > clones, something like this: > cd ~/git > git clone http://somewhere/emacs.git > git clone --branch release-23.4 http://somewhere/emacs.git emacs-release-23.4 > git clone --branch release-24.0 http://somewhere/emacs.git emacs-release-24.0 Yes, that's the obvious possibility. I thought there were others. Thanks. > > As for feature branches, I think relatively short-lived ones will be > > better off in the same directory as the trunk, because they aren't > > expected to diverge too much, so having them co-located actually makes > > a lot of sense and saves time. > > By "co-located", do you mean one .git directory serving multiple working > directories? No, I meant in the same working directory, using "git checkout" to switch between branches. > >> Downsides to a git repository backing multiple working directories, are: > >> - 3 copies of the git repository on disk, rather than just one > > > Doesn't --separate-git-dir solve that problem? > > I don't know. I have never used this. Andreas said this is not a solution.