Public Git repo

[Colin Law]

On 10 January 2011 15:12, Derek Atkins <warlord at mit.edu> wrote:
> Geert Janssens <janssens-geert at telenet.be> writes:
>
>> On Wednesday 05 January 2011, Jeff Kletsky wrote:
>>> I don't like that history is a pretty flexible thing and that "branches"
>>> are just pointers to specific commits, rather than the kind of
>>> "followable path" that svn provides.
>>>
>> That's interesting, because I feel exactly the oposite. I don't like it that
>> for svn a branch or tag is a path into the repository. It has always felt
>> artificial to me and if not treated with proper care could put you into very
>> unwanted situations like people inadvertently committing changes to a tagged
>> release.
>> I guess this is mostly a matter of taste and what you are most used to
>> though...
>
> I like that branches are paths, because you DO want to be able to make
> additional commits into a branch.  So I don't agree with you there.

I am not sure what you are suggesting here.  Using git there is no
problem committing to a branch, just checkout the branch, make the
changes, and commit.  The changes go onto the branch.

> However, I do agree with you about tags.
>
> IMHO branches and tags are (and should be) fundamentally different.  A
> branch should be a path, but a tag is, well, a tag.

I believe they *are* different in git, at least in terms of the normal
usage via the git commands and utilities.

Colin