Hi, On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Brandon Casey wrote: > When we talk about clones we are not always talking about a strict > "full" clone. Here, sir, we disagree. I tend to like the fact that a clone is a clone is a clone. Which BTW is the reason why I do not like requests to "clone" only one branch: this is not a clone. > 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) No. The repository does not even need a working directory (in which case we call it "bare"). Up until now, it _can_ have _one_ working directory. With my plans, it can have more than one. Ciao, Dscho - 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
