We didn't accept this patch because it only works when using the
remote-cache deployment strategy:– and the patch is pretty well documented
for those who need it!
> We didn't accept this patch because it only works when using the
> remote-cache deployment strategy:– and the patch is pretty well documented
> for those who need it!
no worries - I understand that :)
In case it helps, I've seen this use-case arise two times already,
mostly because we wanted to keep 2 or 3 very related projects under a
single github private repository, instead of having 3 repositories to
handle and pay for.
Thibaut, you have a valid point -- maybe we can take some time to look into
this more thoroughly – the truth of the matter is that the majority of
people use this remote-cache anyway, so it works perfectly for them; --
would you mind adding your thoughts about this common usecase to the
lighthosue ticket?
Good luck with the patch; maybe you convinced us to merge it now :)
> > We didn't accept this patch because it only works when using the
> > remote-cache deployment strategy:– and the patch is pretty well
> documented
> > for those who need it!
> no worries - I understand that :)
> In case it helps, I've seen this use-case arise two times already,
> mostly because we wanted to keep 2 or 3 very related projects under a
> single github private repository, instead of having 3 repositories to
> handle and pay for.
|
