Junio C Hamano <gitster <at> pobox.com> writes: > > chris <jugg <at> hotmail.com> writes: > > >> I use the mirror for synchronizing "local" work between my workstations > >> (home/office). So, I use the fact that I can fetch from and push to the mirror. > > It is not quite clear what you meant by "mirror" above, but I am assuming > that you meant that you have a third repository that you use for the sole > purpose of synchronizing your work done in two repositories, one at home > and the other at office. Yes, I was referencing my original post from the top level thread that triggered these patches. > The synchronizing point should be a normal remote in such a case. I find that much more cumbersome. It is much simpler for me to generate various patch branches and before calling it a day/night put all of my pending changes into a wip branch that isn't already on another branch and push to my mirror remote - all refs are pushed. No need to concern myself with ensuring I don't forget a newly created local ref. > If you > mirror-push into the mirror from home, you may lose what you have pushed > from office that you forgot to pull back to home before starting to work > at home via the mirror. It is much more likely for me to forget to push a local ref than to forget to synchronize - the point of this activity is to continue my work in a different location, something I couldn't do if I don't synchronize. As for content in the mirror itself being lost - that is irrelevant, it is just a buffer. The home and/or work repositories have whatever is in the mirror - fetching from the mirror is where fail safes, if any, are needed. > If you mirror-fetch from the mirror from office, > you may lose what you worked locally on office and forgot to push out > before mirror-fetching for one thing, and for another, you will be > overwriting the tip of your current branch. yes, which is the point of my second suggestion to change the fetch refs for a mirror remote if the local repository is not bare. But generally, when intentionally fetching from a mirror I want it to overwrite whatever I have locally, probably because I *had* forgotten to push from home the night before, and subsequently re-implemented the work at the office, so when I get home the following night, I just blow away whatever I have locally with my work from the office. But that action certainly should be explicitly requested and not the default. > Using a pure mirror in such a three-repository situation _can_ be made to > work, but only if you are very careful: *careful* depends on work flow. And a pure mirror approach works quite well for me in this situation, with less effort than manually managing what refs to push. > Hopefully we are already forbidding mirror fetching into a non-bare > repository, so the system is foolproofed in that direction at least to > avoid such mistakes. If you mean what I think you mean, then you are not. > I offhand do not remember if we protect the branch > that is currently checked out from mirror pushing, though. I don't know - I've only mirror pushed to a bare repository. > A safer and more customary way to set up the synchronization between two > repositories is to arrange them to pull from each other (and if you can > initiate connections only in one direction, emulate one side of "git > fetch" with "git push"). "customary" or "ideal"? I certainly won't argue the convenience of such a setup if the logistics allowed for it. Of course the most ideal way to solve this problem would be to have a laptop. In the mean time I have a really useful tool called Git that generally has just enough rounded edges to avoid stabbing myself, but does not dumb things down to the point of being controlling. :) chris -- 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