Subject: Re: Why can't git open empty branches ?

From: Hadmut Danisch <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 13:47:51 +0200

Am 11.04.2012 13:21, schrieb Matthieu Moy:
> BTW, it is rarely good practice to create an empty branch in an existing
> repository. You'll have different branches that do not share any
> history, and they would likely be better in separate repositories (or at
> least, be in separate local repositories, pushed to the same remote bare
> repository, in which case you don't need anything special, just "git
> init" and "git push"). That doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, but just
> that you may want to think twice before doing it ;-).

That's a pretty good point for discussion.

Sometimes people are working on different sorts of information, that are
nevertheless closely related, e.g. open source software and the web
pages describing it (like in git hub), or a web server tree and the
software generating it. They are related, but do not logically share a
history.

Creating independent branches by pushing two separates into a single
remote bare is a nice idea, but if I understood git correctly, the very
first commit in a repos is always to the master branch, where you have
two masters trying to push into the shared remote bare. This is
obviously solvable if you use the correct commands and maybe delete and
re-clone the repos, but this is all overcomplicated and non-trivial.
Nothing I could do without reading manuals.

So your proposal might work perfectly, but in my eyes it is error prone
and not user friendly.

regards