Re: Git/Lilypond workflow

[Graham Breed]

I use Git and Lilypond.  I know Git quite well, but haven't been using 
Lilypond much lately.  I can see from this thread that I'm not using the 
two together efficiently, so I'll describe what I should be doing.

1) Keep a "tools" repository with the include files I depend on, and 
really should keep in one place.

2) Clone "tools" to a "music" repository in a different folder.

3) For a new composition, clone "tools" to a new folder, and make a branch.

4) Push this branch to the "music" repository, so that it becomes a 
single place with all my music that I can back up, share between 
devices, and so on.  (You can link master in the composition repository 
to a branch in "music" if you like.  I'll make the branch.)

5) Publish "tools" as a public repository on Bitbucket or wherever.

6) Clone music I don't want to be public to private repositories (you 
get a few free with Bitbucket).

7) If I change the include files and want them updated for a 
composition, pull from "tools" and merge in.

This way, the tools can be tracked independently of the music that uses 
them, but pieces that depend on a specific version of the tools won't 
magically break.  It's both one and may repositories, which reflects the 
fluid nature of repositories in Git.

In practice, I think "tools" and "music" would be the same.  I think I 
can publish only the branches I want without other changesets leaking 
out.  If you worry about this, keep them distinct and pull only in one 
direction as I describe.


                      Graham