Comments on: Initialize a remote git repository http://hans.fugal.net/blog/2009/02/12/initialize-a-remote-git-repository/ Counterpoint by Hans Fugal Fri, 19 Mar 2010 12:45:46 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Hans http://hans.fugal.net/blog/2009/02/12/initialize-a-remote-git-repository/comment-page-1/#comment-1931 Hans Fri, 03 Apr 2009 20:29:31 +0000 http://hans.fugal.net/blog/?p=1097#comment-1931 You can call it whatever you want, the name of the host is a logical name. You could write "git remote add --mirror repo_on_bar bar:repo" You can call it whatever you want, the name of the host is a logical name. You could write “git remote add –mirror repo_on_bar bar:repo”

]]> By: Hans http://hans.fugal.net/blog/2009/02/12/initialize-a-remote-git-repository/comment-page-1/#comment-1930 Hans Fri, 03 Apr 2009 20:24:15 +0000 http://hans.fugal.net/blog/?p=1097#comment-1930 Any valid remote repository. For example, if you have a github project it might be "git remote add --mirror foo git@github.com:mygithubusername/mygithubproject.git" Any valid remote repository. For example, if you have a github project it might be “git remote add –mirror foo git@github.com:mygithubusername/mygithubproject.git”

]]> By: piotr http://hans.fugal.net/blog/2009/02/12/initialize-a-remote-git-repository/comment-page-1/#comment-1929 piotr Fri, 03 Apr 2009 20:23:47 +0000 http://hans.fugal.net/blog/?p=1097#comment-1929 OK, read the man page. Anyway, it's misleading when you write bar bar:repo OK, read the man page. Anyway, it’s misleading when you write bar bar:repo

]]> By: piotr http://hans.fugal.net/blog/2009/02/12/initialize-a-remote-git-repository/comment-page-1/#comment-1928 piotr Fri, 03 Apr 2009 20:17:52 +0000 http://hans.fugal.net/blog/?p=1097#comment-1928 I'm getting error "not a valid remote name" after "git remote add --mirror ..." Can you give examples of valid ones? I’m getting error “not a valid remote name” after “git remote add –mirror …” Can you give examples of valid ones?

]]> By: Jon http://hans.fugal.net/blog/2009/02/12/initialize-a-remote-git-repository/comment-page-1/#comment-1879 Jon Sun, 01 Mar 2009 23:17:18 +0000 http://hans.fugal.net/blog/?p=1097#comment-1879 Subversion might seem easy at first, and branching in git might not be intuitive to new users. But the difference in being able to merge branches is like night and day between svn and git. Doing any sort of non-trivial branch collapse in svn is way beyond a junior programmer's abilities and they are more likely to create bugs or lose changes than successfully complete an svn merge. Merging in git is relatively painless compared to the other systems I've used (cvs, svn, p4, clearcase). The draw to svn is that everything is a directory, but given that junior programmers almost never attempt to branch I think this feature is overrated. tags are better in CVS than in svn. and both tags and branches are fairly simple in git, once you let go of the idea that encoding all meta data into an URL is not the best approach. Subversion might seem easy at first, and branching in git might not be intuitive to new users. But the difference in being able to merge branches is like night and day between svn and git. Doing any sort of non-trivial branch collapse in svn is way beyond a junior programmer’s abilities and they are more likely to create bugs or lose changes than successfully complete an svn merge. Merging in git is relatively painless compared to the other systems I’ve used (cvs, svn, p4, clearcase).
The draw to svn is that everything is a directory, but given that junior programmers almost never attempt to branch I think this feature is overrated. tags are better in CVS than in svn. and both tags and branches are fairly simple in git, once you let go of the idea that encoding all meta data into an URL is not the best approach.

]]> By: philip http://hans.fugal.net/blog/2009/02/12/initialize-a-remote-git-repository/comment-page-1/#comment-1836 philip Sat, 14 Feb 2009 08:57:31 +0000 http://hans.fugal.net/blog/?p=1097#comment-1836 Ok read it. Interesting.... but .... I'm going to go back to Subversion. I *think* git is good for smart people who know what they are doing and are reasonably independent, junior programmers are going to struggle with it, branching is difficult even for most junior programmers to handle. I have to write software with senior and junior programmers, so I'm going to go for the lowest common denominator. Ok read it.

Interesting…. but …. I’m going to go back to Subversion. I *think* git is good for smart people who know what they are doing and are reasonably independent, junior programmers are going to struggle with it, branching is difficult even for most junior programmers to handle.

I have to write software with senior and junior programmers, so I’m going to go for the lowest common denominator.

]]>