From: git-ow...@vger.kernel.org [git-ow...@vger.kernel.org] on behalf of Lang, David [david.l...@uhn.ca]
> I thought the idea was that each developer installed git locally on their > machines Yes. > and (as needed) committed their changes to the master repository which > resides externally to any of the local machines, such as on a network > server Yes, but committing their changes to the master repository is a two step process: 1. Each developer first commits their changes to their personal repository using the "git commit" command. 2. Each developer pushes their changes from their personal repository to the master repository with the "git push" command > (and which I'm assuming has git installed locally as well). Maybe. If the machine with the master repository has git installed locally, then each developer can push their changes to the master repository using either the git protocol or the ssh protocol. If the machine with the master repository does not have git installed locally, then each developer can push their changes to the master repository using NFS or CIFS/SMB. The git documentation refers to this method as the "file protocol". The other David Lang (da...@lang.hm) believes that using "git push" using NFS or CIFS/SMB may not be safe and reliable. Based on the following article by the creator of git, I believe using "git push" over NFS or CIFS/SMB is safe and reliable: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/122670 The GitFaq wiki also says that using "git push" over NFS or CIFS/SMB is safe and reliable: https://git.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/GitFaq#What_can_I_use_to_set_up_a_public_repository.3F -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
