On Wednesday, 9 May 2018 12:54:22 PM AEST Erik Christiansen via luv-main 
wrote:
> On 09.05.18 08:10, Brian May via luv-main wrote:
> > Russell Coker via luv-main <[email protected]> writes:
> > > It seems that I have to create the master repository with "git init
> > > --bare" and then push from the slave after adding a file.  Adding a
> > > file on the master is also apparently a bad idea.
> > 
> > Both of these apply equally to subversion. You have to create the
> > repository on the master first before you can even conduct the first
> > checkout. You can't interect directly with the master repository, you
> > have to checkout a version somewhere first.
> 
> Heck, that even applies to venerable CVS. The repository remains
> inviolate, and you check out a copy into a working tree, then check back
> in, either to the head or a branch.
> 
> > I am not 100% sure what you mean by "Adding a file on the master is also
> > apparently a bad idea." however the master repository is a "bare
> > respository" not a working tree, so you can't see your files here or add
> > to them unless you create a checkout first.
> 
> Yup, and surely remote check-in/out from the repository is standard for
> them all?

The difference is that systems like CVS and Subversion are explicitely 
designed to have a single primary repository that's not directly accessible.  
No-one would ever think of Subversion as allowing people to do independent 
stuff and merge it later.  Git gives you the impression that you can push/pull 
from anywhere to anywhere when that isn't the case.

-- 
My Main Blog         http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog    http://doc.coker.com.au/



_______________________________________________
luv-main mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.luv.asn.au/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luv-main

Reply via email to