Re: Make a non-bare repo bare.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Mike Ralphson <mike.ralphson@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> 2009/7/16 Graeme Geldenhuys <graemeg@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>>
>>> Funny.
>>>
>>>    http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/123303
>>>
>>> It is posed as a question but describes the correct (and officially
>>> supported) procedure.
>>
>>
>> Now it deserves to be in some Git FAQ. It seems the issue is more common
>> than I thought. :-)
>
> It already is
>
> http://git.or.cz/gitwiki/GitFaq#HowdoImakeexistingnon-barerepositorybare.3F
>
> unless that's new?

Somebody needs to promise to keep that entry up-to-date, or we should
rewrite it so that we do not expose such an implementation detail.

Even today core.bare is not the only difference between a repository with
a work tree and a bare one.  We also set core.logallrefupdates these days
for a repository with a work tree, so the procedure described there is
already stale.  And this kind of implementation details are bound to
change.

Asking git what to do is the only reliable "cut-and-paste-ready" recipe.
--
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]