Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Brandon Casey wrote: > >> Johannes Schindelin wrote: >>> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Brandon Casey wrote: >>>> Have you thought about using git-clone instead? >>> Briefly. But this is not about cloning the repository. It is about >>> having an additional working directory for the current repository. >> I think that is true at the low level, but from a high level it feels >> similar to me. >> >> [...] >> >>> I _want_ the original repository to know that there is another working >>> directory. >> Yes, your ideas are much better than simply adding the functionality of >> the git-new-workdir script (which is what I was planning on doing btw :) > > Somehow these two statements do not work together. Either you have a > clone, or you accept that a new working directory is actually working on > the _same_ repository. When we talk about clones we are not always talking about a strict "full" clone. We have at least: 1) Full clone repository (with/without hardlinks, each is completely independent) 2) --shared/--reference (dependent on original repo, fragile) 3) shallow repository (mostly independent) If your statement above is rephrased to "I _want_ the original repository to know that it has conjoined siblings.", then we have a new repository type: 4) conjoined repository (it has multiple sibling repositories each with their own working directory, but they all share and modify the same .git directory) -brandon - 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
