On 12/27/2009 09:37 PM, K. Haley wrote:
On 12/26/2009 6:10 PM, walt wrote:
This is where I get confused. Is your own repo not identical to the one
on github.com? If not, how does github.com know about those red and
blue branches in the first place?
I appreciate your help with pan -- if you don't have time to give us
git lessons in addition, don't bother to reply.
I can try to explain this.
The short short version. The diagrams for the branches I have pushed
are the same between github& my repo. It simply doesn't have the other
branch names nor any of the commits for the other branches I have locally.
As you may know git tracks commits. Each commit knows its parent(s).
This is used to draw the graph. Branches and tags are nearly the same
in git, both are just named references to a commit not part of the
commit. The main difference is that tags are fixed while branches are
moved with every commit.
Ah, that's the insight I needed, thanks.
Each repo keeps its own list of branches. A
'git push foo' will first send all the commits needed for branch foo,
then it will either create or update branch reference foo.
That should be clear as mud.
Yes indeed :o)
_______________________________________________
Pan-users mailing list
Pan-users@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-users
