Re: Why can't git open empty branches ?

From: Matthieu Moy <matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr>
Date: Apr 11, 2012, 12:19 UTC
Message-ID: <vpqbomyv4t3.fsf@bauges.imag.fr>
In-Reply-To: <4F856F67.4000609@danisch.de>

Hadmut Danisch <hadmut@danisch.de> writes:

> e.g. open source software and the web pages describing it (like in git
> hub), or a web server tree and the software generating it. They are
> related, but do not logically share a history.

In these cases, you'll want to have two working directories, if only to avoid:

git checkout documentation # fix a typo git commit git checkout code make # complete rebuild triggered.

> Creating independent branches by pushing two separates into a single
> remote bare is a nice idea, but if I understood git correctly, the very
> first commit in a repos is always to the master branch,

Not necessarily. I don't see an option in "git init" to change the default branch name, but you can

git init foo cd foo git checkout -b whatever-branch-name

and work.

Otherwise, you can have a branch that is locally called "master", and push it as another name (but that is probably the "error prone" in your message ;-) ).

-- 
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/