Hello Gitsers, I'm a Git newbee, and I have started a project, with a few month's of code in a local git repository. I am the only develloper/contributor to this repo. I have a clone of my repository on a USB key, for back up purposes. Once in a while I work on another machine where I have cloned a repo from the USB key. Since there are no servers involved, I have used pull command to move my 'HEAD' around : after working on machine1 I do : commit to machine1Repo machine1Repo --pull--> USBKeyRepo when I switch on machine2 I start by bringing it up to date from the key : machine2Repo <--pull-- USBKeyRepo and when I'm finished : commit to machine2Repo machine1Repo --pull--> USBKeyRepo So far I have done all of this using the master branch, and things don'g always go smoothly I sometimes have conflicts that don't seem logical, since I'm the only contrbutor, I should never need to do merges. From what I have read my USBKey repo is like a public repo, so I have tried using a bare repo, because since I never work directly on the usb key, the souces on this repo are just adding unnecessary complexity. So far I had no success, because the pull command doesn't recognize my bare repo, it seems that bare repos must me accessed via a daemon process. I suspect that I'm probably not using Git correctly (or optimally), which is why I am inquiring here. Should I be using a dedicated branch on each machine (as if I were two contributors) ? Is it wise to use pulls instead of pushes ? Should I be using a bare repo on my key ? Any insight would be appreciated. Thank you all -- 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