Luben Tuikov <ltuikov@yahoo.com> writes:

quoted text
> It is in this sense that I do "cd <branch>; git-pull . <branch>"
> in a sequence, and I'd rather do "cd <branch>; git-pull <symbolic-ref>"
> to define which branch is the merge coming from given the current branch
> _and_ the symbolic ref.

If I am reading you correctly, you have multiple directories,
each with its own .git/ directory but major parts of these .git/
directories are shared (namely, objects/ and refs/).  You would
not be able to have separate checkout in these directories if
you shared .git/HEAD and .git/index, so at least each of these
directories has these two files for its own.

Is that what you are doing?

If that is the case, I think you do not even have to have the
"branch spec" to express the patchflow among them.  Essentially
you are using "one branch, one directory, one repository"
workflow (my understanding is that this is how BK worked but I
haven't seen it) but with your own improvements.  The reason
this is an improvement is because such a shared .git/refs/
allows you to do diff and log across branches this way, so if
you have a separate .git/config just like you already have
separate .git/HEAD and .git/index in these directories, you can
use [remote "xyz"] sections in each of them to achieve what you
called 'symbolic'.



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html