Re: basics... when reading docs doesn't help

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mar 30, 2007, 20:06 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703301256230.6730@woody.linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.60.0703302135590.10784@poirot.grange>

On Fri, 30 Mar 2007, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> 
> And, so, it's a pity I cloned Paul's tree yesterday with the "old" git. 
> And from your answer above it seems like some features of the "new" git 
> will not be available with this tree, like equally named local and remote 
> branches, etc. There isn't a way to convert such a "old style" tree to the 
> "new style", is there? Not a big deal, will re-clone at some point, maybe 
> when we get local git mirrors...

There's a conversion script to help you convert in place if you care.

Look at the git list for an email that looks something like this:

	Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 02:16:12 -0400
	From: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
	To: git@vger.kernel.org
	Subject: Upgrade to 1.5.0 utility

	Yesterday on #git DrNick wanted a script to update a pre-1.5.0
	Git repository to be like a 1.5.0 (and later) style repository.
	...

which has a script in it to do this (it uses another script that is already in git/contrib/ that just moves all the ".git/remotes" entries as-is from the remotes files into the .git/config file)

I haven't tested it myself, so caveat emptor. But the config file format really isn't *that* complicated - do the conversion with the script, and then just go back and look at .git/config and verify that it looks sane, or edit it to match your taste.

		Linus