Re: Is it possible to have a file shared between branches?

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Apr 12, 2010, 16:10 UTC
Message-ID: <7vd3y4lkik.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.01.1004121639230.60420@kroll.spectro.jussieu.fr>

Eric LEBIGOT <Eric.Lebigot@normalesup.org> writes:

Show 15 quoted lines

> Thank you!  I can see what is done in the git.git repository, thanks
> to your pointer, and it looks like I'm trying to get from git.  But
> how do you create and manage such an independent 'todo' branch?  This
> branch appears on the same level as master, in the pages you gave, but
> you also mention a "non versioned Meta/ directory".  Does this mean
> that the file structure is like the following?
>
>  ./.git
>  Meta/.git
>  Meta/<todo files>
>
> If yes, how do all branches appear at the same level in
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=git/git.git;a=summary ?  If no, how was the
> todo' branch created?  (I would love to have the todo file in the same
> directory as the rest.)

The way this was arranged was simply:

	$ mkdir Meta
        $ cd Meta && git init
        $ do a lot of work that creates files you see on 'todo'
        $ git commit
        $ git push k.org:/pub/scm/git/git.git master:todo
	$ cd .. ;# back to the primary working tree.

And the last step could have been to push into /pub/scm/git/git-todo.git/ iow a separate repository.

The _only_ reason 'todo' and 'master' live in the same repository is because I only have write privilege to /pub/scm/git/git.git/ and not at the /pub/scm/git/ level. Having these unrelated branches in the same repository is nothing to find cool and imitate; I'd recommend not to do it if you don't have to.

Having these unrelated branches published in the same repository helps distribution a bit, but it never helps the use of the contents in these branches.