From: Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 21:43:48 GMT
Subject: Re: Monotone workflow compared to Git workflow ( was RE: Git vs Monotone)
Message-ID: <46a038f90807311443q2bbf7782kbbf339ab77376dc7@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20080731205400.GA7911@atjola.homenet>

On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@gmx.de> wrote:
>> So literally, if you do
>>
>>       git clone <cntral-repo-over-network> <local>
>
> Hum, I guess I'm just missing something and prepare to get flamed, but
> wouldn't you want that one to be bare? Otherwise, the other clones won't
> see all of the original repo's branches, right?

Yes, that's why

   git clone --reference /path/to/fat/checkout/.git/  <central-repo>

is far better. Each "thin" checkout sees the central repo normally,
but they borrow the object store from the referenced local "fat"
checkout.

cheers,


m
-- 
 martin.langhoff@gmail.com
 martin@laptop.org -- School Server Architect
 - ask interesting questions
 - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first
 - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff