On 15 Jun 2010, at 17:53, Frank Loeffler wrote:
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 09:09:24AM -0500, Erik Schnetter wrote:
Do you have experience with branches in git? Is it easier to use branches, or to have separate repositories and push/pull changes in between?
If branches in git are such a headache with extra command line arguments and whatnot - what speaks against using two separate repositories? Exchanging patches between repositories is always sold as one of the strong points of a system like git.
To summarise (I just talked with Barry about this):
git push origin origin:refs/heads/ET_2010_06
This creates the branch in the remote repository.
Any user can then do
git clone <path to repo> git checkout -b ET_2010_06 origin/ET_2010_06
I agree that this is a little bit more typing than if you could do git clone <path to repo>/branchname, but I think it makes more logical sense to have everything in the same repository. After all, most of the content is shared between the branches.