Subject: Re: [boost] [git] Write permission to branch
From: Bjørn Roald (bjorn_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-08 23:58:03
On 12/09/2013 05:19 AM, Edward Diener wrote:
> On 12/8/2013 9:28 PM, Gavin Lambert wrote:
>> On 9/12/2013 13:48, Quoth Edward Diener:
>>>> If you want to erase whatever is on the remote branch (which you
>>>> probably do, since it only contains a dummy commit), force the push
>>> That worked ! Thanks !
>>> Git is still very strange to me but hopefully I will get used to its
>>> peculiarities. It does seem very flexible but very enigmatic sometimes
>>> in its so-called explanations.
>> It's easier if you create your personal GH repository as a clone/fork of
>> the boostorg one that you're intending to modify, instead of making a
>> new empty one (as you did). (It also works better with GH's cross-repo
> I assume there must be a way to do this on GH. Also I really don't know
> what the difference is when one creates another repository as a fork as
> opposed to cloning. Does the fork contain something the clone does not ?
I don't think so. To create a fork they do a clone I presume. I guess
you could call a repository created with git clone a clone until you
make your first change to it, then the term fork fits better.
>> If your local one was also cloned from the same source you should
>> theoretically just have to add your GH repo as a remote and everything
>> should mesh together nicely.
> This is what I tried but since my GH repo had history git didn't like
> that. How odd ! Why can't it just update the history when one does a
> 'push' ? Why does it matter if their is previous history ? As long as
> their are no conflicts should not a git 'push' just work ?
There was conflicts as GitHub had made some history for you in the
> There is much
> in git that says things should be simple and just work but actually it
> seems it has much more checks/balances than svn had.
The fact that you have more than one repository add a lot of
flexibility, but there is a cost of complexity. You are best off
finding patterns that work well and use them.
> I should have just asked for write access to the Boost MPL git
> repository and then I could have pretty easily created a remote branch
> somewhere in Boost for my own testing I think.
Then you could just have pushed right there, a lot simpler.
>> (Ideally your GH repo should be your main
>> "origin" remote but it doesn't really matter as they're all just sibling
>> names; you just need to remember which is which when pushing/pulling.)
> I assume a 'remote' name is a combination of a URL and a branch and the
> name does not matter as long as it is unique for a given local repository.
No, the remote is the repository url or shorthand reference like origin
or your myremote. In addition you specify refspec which is a branch, a
commit, a tag, or some other ref. refs live in each repository and all
of them are simply pointers to a commit. Take a look in .git/refs to see
how simple this system really is.
When you see something like origin/master, that is not a reference to
the master branch on the origin repository, but it is a ref to a local
read/only copy of that remote branch as it was the last time you
performed pull or fetch. These are the so-called remote tracking branches.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk