Short HOWTO on using git for Samba development

Alan DeKok aland at
Mon Jun 25 14:45:21 GMT 2007

simo wrote:
> Yeah tried before and I was disgusted, but I will try to give it another
> go and see if it has improved, I tried it very early.

  I've used mercurial on a number of projects.  It's changed a lot since
you tried it.  It's fast, simple, and has smaller repositories than git. :)

> The only problem I see with git/bzr as the main tree is that it seem to
> introduce a gatekeeper to the "official" tree forcing all people to send
> around patches instead of just committing.

  I'm not sure about git, but mercurial doesn't work that way.
Individuals can sync trees with each other, and push/pull to a central

> This work flow model is ok if a few people work on a very isolated part
> of a tree, or on some experimental features, but if you need to
> collaborate it may make things more annoying.

  What has worked for me for collaboration is the following work flow,
for N people working on a sub-project is to have multiple repositories
and branches.  Each developer has their own repository that they commit
to locally.  Plus, there's a central repository where they coordinate
their changes.  The central repository also has a mirror of the main
public repository.

  The idea is that everyone works in their own private repo.  The group
of people have their own branch.  Plus, there's one central place for
merging updates from the main trunk into the branch, so individual
developers don't have to do this.

  When the feature is done, the merge / push to the main branch is easy,
because the subgroup has maintained sync with the trunk.

  Alan DeKok.

More information about the samba-technical mailing list