On Thu, Jul 12, 2007 at 06:27:26PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 08:57 +0100, Andy Parkins wrote: > > The only time you get an unnecessary rebuild is if you do > > > > git checkout branch1 > > git checkout branch2 > > git checkout branch1 > > > > But we can hardly expect git to be responsible for that. > > Indeed. That's a user error. Git makes it cheap and easy to have > separate _trees_. Just use them -- branches are just another mental > hangover from CVS which we should try to cure ourselves of :) Personally, I just use branches a huge amount, and I will often do git checkout branch1 <hack hack hack> git commit --amend <build, test> git checkout branch2 <hack hack hack> git commit <build, test> git checkout branch1 <build> Rebuilding isn't a problem, because I use ccache. :-) I could use separate trees, I suppose, but then I have to keep multiple copies of the .o files around in all of those separate trees, and it's cheaper and more efficient to keep them in the ccache cache IMHO. And with 7200 RPM laptop drives and dual core processors combined with ccache, I hardly notice the rebuild/relink time. - Ted - 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
