3 ms·
Exactly, but having branches kind of allow you to not have to create local clones. And I legit use rsync to clone locally git repos. The question is : what is t
by d-lisp 3y ago
Exactly, but having branches kind of allow you to not have to create local clones. And I legit use rsync to clone locally git repos. The question is : what is the best ?
- nerdponx 3y agoYou can have multiple worktrees per repo. Usually that's the best solution instead of local clones.
- kilroy123 3y agoThis is what I do for complex projects.
- d-lisp 3y agoThat's interesting, some kind of meta branches.
- kazinator 3y agoThe git-worktree man page says: BUGS Multiple checkout in general is still experimental, and the support for submodules is incomplete. It is NOT recommended to make multiple checkouts of a superproject. Source: https://git-scm.com/docs/git-worktree https://git-scm.com/docs/git-worktree It complicates git with more cruft. A separate clone is more understandable and independent. If you trash something in its .git/ subdirectory, only that repo is affected.
- nerdponx 3y agoI'd hardly call it "cruft". Git has a lot of features. Not all of them are useful for all combinations of projects, workflows, and people. In my use case, independence would be an anti-feature. git-worktree fulfills a specific desire that I cannot fulfill with any known alternative. Therefore I use it. As for actual bugs, I certainly never encountered any. But I also don't use it with repos that contain submodules, as per the warning.