On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Gitweb can deal with non-bare repositories. It is only that because > gitweb is not interested in working area, it shows $GIT_DIR (path to > repository itself) as name/path to repository. Therefore repo/.git > for non-bare repositories, because it is repository itself that matters. I understand that, but why does gitweb have to punish me because I give it more than it cares about? > If you provide access for others, i.e. if those repositories shown in > gitweb are public repositories, it is much better to use bare > repositories for that. Why? What difference does it make if they clone directly from my working tree, instead of some shadow repository? -- Timur Tabi Linux kernel developer at Freescale -- To unsubscribe from this list: 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