Re: [PATCH] Documentation: Note about the meaning of "clone"
- From
Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jun 15, 2008, 13:39 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200806151539.17967.jnareb@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <200806151505.27686.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com>
Robin Rosenberg wrote:
> > Clarify that a clone is not an exact copy.
Show 5 quoted lines
> +*NOTE*: Although this command is called clone, the clone is not identical > +in all respects. Local branches in the repository being cloned > +becomes remote tracking branches in the clone and remote tracking > +branches are not cloned at all. For security reasone the config sections > +and triggers are not cloned either.
One nitpick, one comment, one historical comment.
Nitpick: Actually biological clone is usually not identical in phenotype, and we know now that due to different gene expression it can have different genotype as well. ;-)
COMMENT: when you do "git clone --bare" it mirrors local (regular) branches in 1:1 correspondence; but it still doesn't clone anything outside refs/heads/ and refs/remotes (and HEAD).
Historical comment: git-clone used to do 1:1 mapping even for non-bare clone, with exception of <current branch> -> origin mapping, before behavior provided by --use-separate-remotes was made default (thanks Carl!).
-- Jakub Narebski Poland