From: Matthieu Moy Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 12:19:52 GMT Subject: Re: Why can't git open empty branches ? Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <4F856F67.4000609@danisch.de> Hadmut Danisch 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/