Re: [PATCHv2] Documentation/git-submodule.txt: Add Description section

[Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz>]

On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 12:29:03PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> writes:
> 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/git-submodule.txt b/Documentation/git-submodule.txt
> > index 76702a0..87c4ece 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/git-submodule.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/git-submodule.txt
> > @@ -16,6 +16,28 @@ SYNOPSIS
> >  'git submodule' [--quiet] summary [--summary-limit <n>] [commit] [--] [<path>...]
> >  
> >  
> > +DESCRIPTION
> > +-----------
> > +Submodules are a special kind of tree entries which refer to a particular tree
> > +in another repository (living at a given URL).  ...
> 
> In the documentation, "tree" has a specific meaning.  Perhaps "a
> particular tree state" is a better wording than another alternative "a
> particular commit", because you mention "the exact revision" in the
> following sentence.

The two sentences are now highly redundant, so...

> I'd suggest dropping " (living at a given URL)" from here, though.

...actually, in the end I have completely rewritten this yet again. The
description was too low-level (and kind of in fact explained gitlinks
instead of submodules), while we should carefully explain the high-level
concept of submodules first, only then talk about tree entries.

> > ...  The tree entry describes
> > +the existence of a submodule with the given name and the exact revision that
> > +should be used, while the location of the repository is described in the
> > +`/.gitmodules` file.
> 
> Strictly speaking, ".gitmodules" merely gives a hint to be used by
> "submodule init", the canonical location from which the repository is
> expected to be cloned.  I do not think this overview needs to go into such
> a detail.  The description of "init" subcommand might need clarification,
> though.

I believe we should mention it. The users *will* see this file e.g.
during submodule merges, as well as in git status output when
manipulating submodules.


On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 01:41:24PM +0300, Heikki Orsila wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 16, 2008 at 08:44:12PM +0200, Petr Baudis wrote:
> > I have adjusted the description a bit; however, I believe mentioning
> > remotes in
> > the description would only raise the danger of confusion - I emphasized the
> > level of separation, though.
> 
> I think not doing a comparison actually creates confusion. My immediate 
> thought about submodules was "how does this differ from remotes? why do 
> submodules exist rather than just remotes?"

Ok, now I realize this is a good point, and it's a nice chance to give a
plug for the subtree merge strategy as an alternative. ;-)

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
GNU, n. An animal of South Africa, which in its domesticated state
resembles a horse, a buffalo and a stag. In its wild condition it is
something like a thunderbolt, an earthquake and a cyclone. -- A. Pierce