From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johan Herland Subject: Re: RFC: submodule terminology Date: Mon, 21 May 2007 01:16:24 +0200 Message-ID: <200705210116.25079.johan@herland.net> References: <20070520214417.GM5412@admingilde.org> <200705210006.47266.johan@herland.net> <20070520230352.GQ5412@admingilde.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: Martin Waitz To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 21 01:17:14 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HpueF-000552-0W for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 21 May 2007 01:17:11 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758066AbXETXRI (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 May 2007 19:17:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758151AbXETXRI (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 May 2007 19:17:08 -0400 Received: from smtp.getmail.no ([84.208.20.33]:35196 "EHLO smtp.getmail.no" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758066AbXETXRG (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 May 2007 19:17:06 -0400 Received: from pmxchannel-daemon.no-osl-m323-srv-009-z2.isp.get.no by no-osl-m323-srv-009-z2.isp.get.no (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-7.05 (built Sep 5 2006)) id <0JID00H074OEQ600@no-osl-m323-srv-009-z2.isp.get.no> for git@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 21 May 2007 01:17:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.getmail.no ([10.5.16.1]) by no-osl-m323-srv-009-z2.isp.get.no (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-7.05 (built Sep 5 2006)) with ESMTP id <0JID00E7C4ND1S30@no-osl-m323-srv-009-z2.isp.get.no> for git@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 21 May 2007 01:16:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from alpha.herland ([84.210.6.167]) by no-osl-m323-srv-004-z1.isp.get.no (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-7.05 (built Sep 5 2006)) with ESMTP id <0JID00IS14NDTC50@no-osl-m323-srv-004-z1.isp.get.no> for git@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 21 May 2007 01:16:25 +0200 (CEST) In-reply-to: <20070520230352.GQ5412@admingilde.org> Content-disposition: inline User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Monday 21 May 2007, Martin Waitz wrote: > hoi :) > > On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 12:06:47AM +0200, Johan Herland wrote: > > For the high-level concept, "subproject" seems to me the best > > alternative. I think it is much better than "submodule" at > > describing that the subproject is a stand-alone project/repo in > > itself. > > it may be developed independently but for the sake of the more important > bigger ("the top level project") it really is only one small part. > That and the fact that "module" is already an established term > in software makes me prefer "submodule". > For me the project is always the top-level one: the project you > currently work for. "The project you currently work for" depends on your POV. But I agree that using the term "project" alone might be confusing. That's why I'd rather talk about "superproject" and "subproject". That way, there's no ambiguity at all. > > As for the low-level concept, I personally prefer "gitlink", but > > I don't have any strong feelings. The fact that "gitlink" seems > > to already be used in the code (as in resolve_gitlink_ref() etc.), > > coupled with "dirlink" being somewhat ambiguous (i.e. may also be > > interpreted as "(sym)link to directory") makes the case for me. > > The only problem I have with gitlink is that there already was > a lot of discussion about some entirely different "gitlink", so > choosing a different name is not that bad. > Aside from that I prefer gitlink, too. The term "gitlink" is ambiguous/confusing? I didn't know. What's the other meaning of gitlink? (Unless you're talking about gitlink as in "gitlink:git[7]" which appears all over our asciidoc documentation, but I don't think that counts...) Have fun! ...Johan -- Johan Herland, www.herland.net