On 27 Mar 2009 at 14:47, Etienne Vallette d'Osia wrote: > Ulrich Windl a écrit : > > AFAIK, "committing" in git is "kind of publishing your work" (others may pull it). > > I don't like publishing my mistakes ;-) Even if no-one pulls the commit, your > > "undo" refers to "committing a fix for the last committed mistake", right? Again, > > I don't really want to document/archive (i.e. commit) my mistake. Or did I miss > > something here? > > I know: Other's opinions are quite different on these issues. > > commit is local. I had made the experience that you can "pull" from a local directory (unless permissions forbid it). As I can't control what others are doing, a "commit" is still more or less making the results public (unless you can convince me that I'm wrong). OK, I grew up with servers that host hundreds of users, not with having my own laptop... > The good way is to commit in your local and private repository. > Then you can do anything, reset commit you have just done, etc > When all is ok, you push in a public repository. > > With this workflow, no one see your local work and you can commit very > often, undo commit, rebase a lot etc. > > The only result of a such job is a large number of useless objects in > your local repository. They will be delete automatically by git, so it's > not a problem. > > Regard, > Etienne -- 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
