threads / discuss / 9345

multiple checked out branches

Subject: multiple checked out branches

## tl;dr

6 messages between Aug 1, 2007 and Aug 2, 2007.

replies: 5people: 5as markdown or json

Domenico Andreoli· Aug 1, 2007, 22:04 UTC · lore

Hi again,

  I would like to contemporaneously work with multiple branches out of
the same git repository. This does not work out of the box.

So I prepare multiple copies of the same repository, every one will have its own checked out branch but I want to share most of their .git subdir.

I surely want to share the object db, the local and remote refs. This way it is enough to make a round of fetches/merges/pushes to have all the shared-repositories up to date.

I expect to do the trick with some symlinks but I am not an expert of git internals. Which traps are waiting me? Any hint? Thank you.

Regards, Domenico

-----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok
 --[ http://www.dandreoli.com/gpgkey.asc
   ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936  4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50

Julian Phillips· Aug 1, 2007, 22:19 UTC · re: Domenico Andreoli · lore

Re: multiple checked out branches

On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Domenico Andreoli wrote:

> Hi again,
>
>  I would like to contemporaneously work with multiple branches out of
> the same git repository. This does not work out of the box.

Depends on how you define "the box" ...

There is a script to do this in contrib called git-new-workdir. It allows you to have multiple working directories from the same repository for exactly this purpose.

Show 9 quoted lines

> So I prepare multiple copies of the same repository, every one will have
> its own checked out branch but I want to share most of their .git subdir.
>
> I surely want to share the object db, the local and remote refs.
> This way it is enough to make a round of fetches/merges/pushes to have
> all the shared-repositories up to date.
>
> I expect to do the trick with some symlinks but I am not an expert of
> git internals. Which traps are waiting me? Any hint? Thank you.

Symlinks are exactly what is used by new-workdir to link the workdirs back to the original repository.

The biggest issue with doing this is that you have no protection against making changes on the same branch in more than one place - something you really don't want to be dealing with. Basically you need to be careful about updating refs that you have checkedout in workdirs.

-- 
Julian

  ---
...when fits of creativity run strong, more than one programmer or writer has
been known to abandon the desktop for the more spacious floor.
- Fred Brooks, Jr.

Domenico Andreoli· Aug 2, 2007, 00:02 UTC · re: Julian Phillips · lore

Re: multiple checked out branches

On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 11:19:25PM +0100, Julian Phillips wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

>
> The biggest issue with doing this is that you have no protection against 
> making changes on the same branch in more than one place - something you 
> really don't want to be dealing with.  Basically you need to be careful 
> about updating refs that you have checkedout in workdirs.

Yes, I figured out this would have been a problem after thinking at it a bit more. I surely do not want to be careful about acting on the same branch in two working repositories at the same place.

The actual problem is that switching form a branch to another makes my autotools fuck and I have to rebuild stuff all the time. My box is still a faint-hearted single core...

cheers, Domenico

-----[ Domenico Andreoli, aka cavok
 --[ http://www.dandreoli.com/gpgkey.asc
   ---[ 3A0F 2F80 F79C 678A 8936  4FEE 0677 9033 A20E BC50

Guilhem Bonnefille· Aug 2, 2007, 17:16 UTC · re: Domenico Andreoli · lore

Re: multiple checked out branches

On 8/2/07, Domenico Andreoli <cavokz@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 11:19:25PM +0100, Julian Phillips wrote:
> The actual problem is that switching form a branch to another makes
> my autotools fuck and I have to rebuild stuff all the time. My box is
> still a faint-hearted single core...

I encounter same problem. Actually, I did full rebuild every time (which is counter-productive). But, reading at your mail, I have an other idea: what about the "remote" compilation offered by autotools?

Normally, autotools are design in such way that you can share the same source for different configuration. To do this, simply create one "build" directory per branch, go to this directory and do: ../configure && make

I'm unable to try it now, so I express now all my "confuses" if it was a bad idea.

-- 
Guilhem BONNEFILLE
-=- #UIN: 15146515 JID: guyou@im.apinc.org MSN: guilhem_bonnefille@hotmail.com
-=- mailto:guilhem.bonnefille@gmail.com
-=- http://nathguil.free.fr/

Alex Riesen· Aug 1, 2007, 22:34 UTC · re: Domenico Andreoli · lore

Re: multiple checked out branches

Domenico Andreoli, Thu, Aug 02, 2007 00:04:35 +0200:

Show 15 quoted lines

> Hi again,
> 
>   I would like to contemporaneously work with multiple branches out of
> the same git repository. This does not work out of the box.
> 
> So I prepare multiple copies of the same repository, every one will have
> its own checked out branch but I want to share most of their .git subdir.
> 
> I surely want to share the object db, the local and remote refs.
> This way it is enough to make a round of fetches/merges/pushes to have
> all the shared-repositories up to date.
> 
> I expect to do the trick with some symlinks but I am not an expert of
> git internals. Which traps are waiting me? Any hint? Thank you.
>

No traps. Supported. See for "git clone -s" and "git clone -l"

Johannes Schindelin· Aug 1, 2007, 22:39 UTC · re: Alex Riesen · lore

Re: multiple checked out branches

Hi,

On Thu, 2 Aug 2007, Alex Riesen wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

> Domenico Andreoli, Thu, Aug 02, 2007 00:04:35 +0200:
> > 
> >   I would like to contemporaneously work with multiple branches out of
> > the same git repository. This does not work out of the box.
> > 
> > So I prepare multiple copies of the same repository, every one will have
> > its own checked out branch but I want to share most of their .git subdir.
> > 
> > I surely want to share the object db, the local and remote refs.
> > This way it is enough to make a round of fetches/merges/pushes to have
> > all the shared-repositories up to date.
> > 
> > I expect to do the trick with some symlinks but I am not an expert of
> > git internals. Which traps are waiting me? Any hint? Thank you.
> > 
> 
> No traps. Supported. See for "git clone -s" and "git clone -l"

That is not completely what is wanted, AFAIU: "git clone -s" and "git clone -l" allow for unsynchronised branches. For example, when you committed to branch "foo" in the cloned repo, branch "foo" in the original repo will be older until you push.

Ciao, Dscho