Hi! Dear diary, on Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 04:13:28PM CEST, I got a letter where Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> said that... > You misunderstood me: I was talking about a (hidden) local multiplexer. Yes; I just wanted to cover another obvious alternative. :-) > But in the scenario you painted, wouldn't it be practical to have one > consolidated repo _in addition_ to the small ones? Of course, the refs in > the consolidated one would have to be prefixed with the name of the repo > they come from. You still have problems with tags, for example, and pushing may get tricky. It's also non-intuitive for users (I'm seeing some repositories in gitweb but fetching from something completely different, and look at those weird things I have to do with the branches, or git will clone _all_ the xorg projects at once for me, eeek). Of course you could hide all that elaborately in the porcelain but I think this turns to be eventually much less-impact solution which is significantly easier to maintain for the repository admins, intuitive for users and also simpler for porcelains supporting at least light-weight subprojects. -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ Snow falling on Perl. White noise covering line noise. Hides all the bugs too. -- J. Putnam - : send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html