Re: Obscure error/warning/information message from git pull

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

> So "git clone" is defined in terms of "clone".  Looks like a recursive
> "definition" to me - part of what "git clone" does is to "clone[s] a
> repository".  There then follows an incoherent list of the form "does
> A, then does B, then does C, ...".
>
> What is missing is a definition of "clone".  It would appear to mean
> "make a partial copy of".

No.  Your copy is a complete copy of everything you ask for.  If you
don't clone a particular branch, for example, by using a single-branch
clone, that branch will not magically be in your repository.

> Please correct me if I'm mistaken here, but I think my "git clone"ing
> of the repository at savannah only partially copied that repository,
> thus I have an incomplete copy of it.

It depends on what you cloned.  It will clone exactly what you asked it
to clone.  If you chose not to clone some branches, they will not be in
your repository.

> So git's concept of "distributed vcs" is that the repository is
> collectively stored across many computers, as contrasted with bzr's
> and hg's model where the complete repository is stored on each
> participating computer.

Nonsense.  _Everything_ you asked for is stored on your computer.  Git
does not maintain any data off-computer.

> And a subsequent git checkout will require access, possibly net
> access, to the repository from which the current one was copied, yes?

No.  checkouts are a strictly local operation.

-- 
David Kastrup