From: Tay Ray Chuan Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2010 02:17:34 GMT Subject: Re: Advice for "pseudo public" repository on a USB key for a single contributer project Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <554f5f781001231027vd322045hf84e2a16208bcc9f@mail.gmail.com> Hi, 2010/1/24 Maxime Lévesque : >  Since there are no servers involved, I have used pull command >  to move my 'HEAD' around : > >  after working on machine1 I do : > >    commit to machine1Repo >    machine1Repo  --pull--> USBKeyRepo I think you mean "push", since what you want is to make the changes in machine1Repo available in USBKeyRepo. >  when I switch on machine2 I start by bringing it up to date from the key : > > >    machine2Repo  <--pull-- USBKeyRepo > >   and when I'm finished  : > >   commit to machine2Repo >   machine1Repo  --pull--> USBKeyRepo I think you mean "push" here and s/machine1/machine2/ too, so that would read machine2Repo --push--> USBKeyRepo When you make changes on machine2 and go back to machine1, you need to fetch/pull in your changes, just like you do for machine2Repo: machine1Repo  <--pull-- USBKeyRepo >   From what I have read my USBKey repo is like a public repo, >  so I have tried using a bare repo, because since I never work >  directly on the usb key, the souces on this repo are just >  adding unnecessary complexity. So far I had no success, >  because the pull command doesn't recognize my bare repo, >  it seems that bare repos must me accessed via a daemon process. What's your config? Assuming you use master everywhere, I think you could use this in your config: [remote "USBKeyRepo"] url = /path/to/repo fetch = master [branch "master"] remote = USBKeyRepo merge = master >  Is it wise to use pulls instead of pushes ? See above. You can't use one "instead of" another - they serve different purposes and don't replace one another. >  Should I be using a bare repo on my key ? Definitely, or else you would have a working tree in that repo too but it never gets updated - not to mention all the warnings git would show. -- Cheers, Ray Chuan