Re: git guidance

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Dec 6, 2007, 20:22 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0712062119090.21625@wbgn129.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <200712072155.04643.a1426z@gawab.com>

Hi,

On Fri, 7 Dec 2007, Al Boldi wrote:

Show 20 quoted lines

> Andreas Ericsson wrote:
> > Al Boldi wrote:
> >
> > > By pulling the sources into a git-client manager mounted on some 
> > > dir, it should be possible to let the developer work 
> > > naturally/transparently in a readable/writeable manner, and only 
> > > require his input when reverting locally or committing to the 
> > > server/repository.
> >
> > How is that different from what every SCM, including git, is doing 
> > today? The user needs to tell the scm when it's time to take a 
> > snapshot of the current state. Git is distributed though, so 
> > committing is usually not the same as publishing. Is that lack of a 
> > single command to commit and publish what's nagging you? If it's not, 
> > I completely fail to see what you're getting at, unless you've only 
> > ever looked at repositories without a worktree attached, or you think 
> > that git should work like an editor's "undo" functionality, which 
> > would be quite insane.
> 
> You need to re-read the thread.

I don't know why you write that, and then say thanks. Clearly, what you wrote originally, and what Andreas pointed out, were quite obvious indicators that git already does what you suggest.

You _do_ work "transparently" (whatever you understand by that overused term) in the working directory, unimpeded by git.

And whenever it is time to revert or commit, you cry for help, invoking git.

So either you succeeded in making yourself misunderstood, or Andreas had quite the obvious and correct comment for you.

Not that diffcult, Dscho