Re: Git + LilyPond

[Peter Bjuhr]

Thanks for all suggestions. It's really appreciated!

> > I have a question for those who use version control (and especially 
> > Git) with LilyPond:
> >
> > When I write a new piece (or rather when a first version is written) 
> > I'd like to edit this as a single repo. But when it's (more) finished 
> > I think it would be better to collect it with other pieces in a 
> > larger repo (with the history intact of course). How can I do this? 
> > Is it a good idea?
>
> why not using branches? 

> if you're intending to merge repositories later anyway it might make 
> sense to have them in one repository right from the start. 


I haven't really considered this because I like the idea of having the 
pieces initially as single repos and only use the larger repo as a 
showcase/collection/library. But I shall give it some more thought though!

> All the revision control magic I've seen until now ended with "How 
> could we ever have
> thought that was a good idea". Go with the flow.

I agree! With Git I think it is often best to keep it simple - code 
orderly, record the the history and keep it in sync. (It's no bad bad 
thing to know some Git magic though if you really need it...)

Therefore I was also hesitant of following some more advanced strategies 
I found.

> See e.g.
> http://blog.karssen.org/2013/06/06/importing-a-git-repo-into-another-one-keeping-all-history/
> and several other discussions on the internets.

> This approach isn't very good because it includes an artificial commit 
> that moves all stuff to some directory.
>
> You should rather use a subtree merge: 
> https://git-scm.com/book/en/v1/Git-Tools-Subtree-Merging which allows 
> to port commits between "big" repo and any remaining "subrepos"

This is very useful. I'll save this for later reference. But I'm not 
sure I need this technique for the present purpose.

What I now consider is my best option in this case is to simply add the 
single repo as a remote in the larger repo and merge it in.

I'm glad I asked the question. I were complicating things too much 
before, I think.

Best
Peter