On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 10:27:04PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> The $GIT_BARE idea sounds very sensible to me.
Unfortunately, it is not quite as simple as that. I just wrote up the
patch, and it turns out that we are foiled by how core.bare is treated.
If it is true, the repo is definitely bare
The $GIT_BARE idea sounds very sensible to me.
Jeff King wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 05:47:45PM -0500, Mark Lodato wrote:
>
>> It seems that the fallback bare repository detection in the absence
>of
>> core.bare fails for aliases.
>
>This triggered some deja vu for me, so I went digging. A
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 05:47:45PM -0500, Mark Lodato wrote:
> It seems that the fallback bare repository detection in the absence of
> core.bare fails for aliases.
This triggered some deja vu for me, so I went digging. And indeed, this
has been a bug since at least 2008. This patch (which never
3 matches
Mail list logo
