On 08 Sep 10:07, Mark Rogers wrote:
I'm slowly getting my head around git.
I am trying it out on a large project, which is on a server (in my office) to which I have only SSH access, or access to the files via Samba. I ran a merge (which took quite while) and now need handle the conflicts.
Looking for a decent tool to assist with the merge, I find that most are GUI based, and that suits me fine (and will help me get others in the office to buy-in to using it). However, if I access the files over the samba share and run "git status" it takes a while (10 mins?), presumably because my local git is having to deal with a lot of traffic over the network.
Is there a better way to use a local merge tool on a remote repo?
This sounds like you're abusing git in ways it's not supposed to be abused in.
(1) Clone the git repository (using ssh) (2) Work on your (now local) clone of the code (3) Push the code to the shared repository (4) Add a post-commit hook to the shared repository that automagically checks out the latest head and deploys it on the server
Get in to a proper git workflow.
Also, if this is "live" code that the rest of the world should see, you should be deploying it to a staging server first to test, and probably have a release branch as well as a master branch, everyone works on master (or their own private branches off that), and then commits to master, when there's a stable version, merge it in to the release branch, tag the release, and bob's your mother's brother.
Using a git repository over samba sounds like a whole world of pain, samba doesn't really do file caching, either, so you're hitting a lot of network traffic when you probably don't need to.
When you say "I ran a merge" what do you mean?
Thanks,