Re: Cloning empty repositories, was Re: What is the idea for bare repositories?
- From
Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
- Date
- Nov 12, 2007, 22:06 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LFD.0.9999.0711121702030.21255@xanadu.home>
- In-Reply-To
- <7v4pfr2kmh.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> His second point is also a real issue. If you allowed cloning > an empty repo (either bare or non-bare), then you and Bill can > both clone from it, come up with an initial commit each. Bill > pushes his initial commit first. Your later attempt to push > will hopefully fail with "non fast forward", if you know better > than forcing such a push, but then what? You need to fetch, and > merge (or rebase) your change on top of Bill's initial commit, > and at that point the history you are trying to merge does not > have any common ancestor with his history.
While that could well be true, I don't see this condition happening solely in the context (hence because) of an empty clone.
Nicolas