Re: git + unison

From: Remi Vanicat <vanicat@debian.org>
Date: Dec 2, 2007, 18:13 UTC
Message-ID: <87y7cd7yo9.dlv@vanicat.homelinux.org>
In-Reply-To: <vpqd4tpgepj.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>

Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> writes:

> Hi,
>

[...] Note that I do use I do use both unison and git, but I don't use unison on git repository (I use git to synchronize git repository).

Show 6 quoted lines

> So, at the moment, I have both unison and git. My fear is that unison
> touches the content of the .git/ directories. So, for example, if I
> commit on one side, and commit something else on the other side, I'll
> get unison conflicts at least on .git/refs/heads/master and
> .git/index, and resolving the conflict in favor of either side leads
> to dangling objects whith important content.

Well, at least with my configuration, when a file have been change on both side, unison offer the possibility to transfer one way or the other or to do nothing. I believe that if this happen, the correct procure is to use git tool to merge (as git is better for merging than unison, even more when we are speaking about git repository)

Show 5 quoted lines

>
> What I'm doing right now is that I try to make sure I don't run unison
> when trees have diverged, which is not really satisfactory since 1) I
> can be wrong, and a miss-synchronization could lead to data-loss, and
> 2) that means not really taking advantage of unison.

Well, as I've already said, I use unison in an interactive way, so if a file have been changed in both side, unison say it, ask me what to do. So I can choose to do nothing, and to stop unison right away to use a better tool for this task.

-- 
Rémi Vanicat