Re: git newbie errors

[Francis Moreau <francis.moro@gmail.com>]

Steinar Bang <sb@dod.no> writes:

> I learnt something about git today.  We've been running it in a CVS like
> fashion, and that is (apparently) not the way.
>
> What we did was to have one branch in the hub index that our group was
> working on, and then we all each had a local branch tracking it, and we
> were all working directly on our local tracking branches.
>
> When we then did "git pull" we got some odd merges done into our local
> branches.  It was hard to see what had happened and hard to undo.  
>
> I ended up with a fresh git clone, replace the index in the working
> directory, and doing a "git reset --hard" today, after a misbegotten
> clean up attempt.
>
> So... what we'll do come tomorrow, is:
>  - each create a local branch tracking the shared branch on origin
>  - branch off from this local tracking branch to do work, and commit all
>    of our work to this branch
>  - when finished working, switch to the local tracking branch
>  - pull ff changes from the shared origin branch
>  - merge in the local work branch into the tracking branch
>  - handle conflicts
>  - push
>  - if the push fails (because someone else have pushed since your pull),
>    reset --hard your tracking branch, do a new ff pull from origin, do a
>    merge from the temp branch and try pushing again (repeat as needed)
>  - when push has completed the work branch can be deleted (git branch -d
>    will only delete remerged branches)
>
> This is the recommended CVS-like pattern of git (or so I'm told).

But why still using CVS-like pattern with git ?

IOW, why not using git as it should be ?

-- 
Francis