Hi, thanks for your answers, I appreciate that. I read about cherry-picking, but I am not quite sure if that's really what we need. Lets assume, you do a new feature: /featureX You will commit it, check it out on the testserver and probably see a bug, fix it, commit and push it again. (and probably more commits after the testing person ran over other issues). With cherry-picking, I would need to know all commits I have to pick. But as there have been serveral commits, so wouldn't it be a pain to check all commits to that file or directory to have the same version? Just trying to find the right way to handle that. About the 2nd point - I am not sure if I get the different repositories thing. Do you talk about to different clones of the rep, and give different directory permissions on it, or is there a way to have like to completly different git rep's running and still merge things over (both ways)? I just thought this approach would break correct mergin, as it doesn't know where it's comming from. The only thing I ran over so far is probably doing a hook for that (like a pre-pull hook if that exists). didn't get to read too much about hooks yet, just did the update hook that checks if the user with specific ssh key is allowed to push to a specific branch. That works pretty good and is more important in fact. But having 2 completly different repos would be another solution, but I kinda wonder that mergin would work correctly this way (if both sides have changes). Thanks Patrick -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Jeff King [mailto:peff@xxxxxxxx] Gesendet: Sonntag, 28. Juni 2009 20:47 An: Patrick Neuner - Futureweb.at Cc: Andreas Ericsson; git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Betreff: Re: Parallell Development / Switching to GIT On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 07:51:26PM +0200, Patrick Neuner - Futureweb.at wrote: > 1) What if I only want to merge a specific file/directly, but not the > whole branch, is there a way? > [...] > The reason is, that external developers will only commit to > development branch. They are working on new features, and sometimes > some small bugfixes, or design templates. Those need to be merged > separately, and we try to not have more branches. As developers can > access our testserver and then see what they have done and test > functionality. For the situation you describe, it is not about merging a specific _file_, but rather you want to pick specific _commits_ from the development branch that have the bugfixes (or whatever) that you need, and merge the changes introduced by those commits (but not the rest of the history). And that is easy to do; it is called cherry-picking, and you can use "git cherry-pick" to pick specific commits from development to master. > 2) We are using gitosis to give external developers access to the > branches and have some kind of access restriction. But we are only > able to limit push rights, not pull rights. In most cases, that's not > a problem, if they see master And development, but sometimes (like for > external designers), we might want them to only be able to checkout > some directories. There are two ways you can split access, and one will work but the other will not. In git, you generally cannot split your data by _tree_. That is, you cannot say "here is all of the history for the master branch, but you are only allowed to look at some subset of the files." Because at a fundamental level, git is about tracking changes to the _whole_ set of files over time, and it makes the assumption that if you have commit X, which points to tree Y, which points to files A, B, and C, that you will have the data for X, Y, A, B, and C in your repository. However, if you have your data split by _history_, that might work. That is, if you have a "master" branch and a "development" branch, you can in theory say "you may look at the history of master, but not of development". The usual way to do that is to actually keep "master" and "development" in two different repositories, and only grant read permission in the filesystem for the "master" one (which obviously implies doing your reading over something authenticated, like ssh). Hope that helps, -Peff ��.n��������+%������w��{.n��������n�r������&��z�ޗ�zf���h���~����������_��+v���)ߣ�m