Re: On git 1.6 (novice's opinion)
On 27 Mar 2009 at 14:47, Etienne Vallette d'Osia wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> 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...
Show 13 quoted lines
> 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