From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Andreas Ericsson Subject: Re: [RFC] Submodules in GIT Date: Fri, 01 Dec 2006 19:06:17 +0100 Message-ID: <45706F19.6090609@op5.se> References: <20061130170625.GH18810@admingilde.org> <200612010902.51264.andyparkins@gmail.com> <20061201110032.GL18810@admingilde.org> <45701B8D.1030508@b-i-t.de> <20061201121234.GQ18810@admingilde.org> <4570289D.9050802@b-i-t.de> <20061201133558.GU18810@admingilde.org> <45703174.8000609@op5.se> <20061201134610.GW18810@admingilde.org> <457041AD.4010601@op5.se> <20061201150045.GZ18810@admingilde.org> <45705A94.2070509@op5.se> <457061A7.2000102@b-i-t.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2006 18:06:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Martin Waitz Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060913) In-Reply-To: <457061A7.2000102@b-i-t.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GqCmE-0004oG-T7 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 01 Dec 2006 19:06:23 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759315AbWLASGU (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2006 13:06:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759319AbWLASGU (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2006 13:06:20 -0500 Received: from linux-server1.op5.se ([193.201.96.2]:34208 "EHLO smtp-gw1.op5.se") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759315AbWLASGT (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Dec 2006 13:06:19 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.20] (unknown [213.88.215.14]) by smtp-gw1.op5.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 76D0B6BCC5; Fri, 1 Dec 2006 19:06:18 +0100 (CET) To: sf Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org sf wrote: > > That is one of the points Martin Waitz and I are discussing. > > If I understand you correctly you cannot make any changes to the > submodules code _in the supermodule's repository_, no bugfixes, no > extensions, no adaptions, nothing. Do you mean that? > > That would be a third alternative. In my opinion the usefulness of > submodules would be unnecessarily restricted if it comes to the choice > of either using the code from upstream as is or do not use submodules at > all. What is the point of the restriction? > That depends on your definition of submodule. In my eyes, a submodule is a separate repo that can be committed to separately (and generally also built separately), although it's usually built into something else. I'm imagining most submodules will contain only library code and its testing routines. Insofar as I've envisioned submodules, it's a separate git repo where you simply record a certain snapshot of the sub-repo with a commit in the super-module, like so: $ git commit ssl-functions/*.[ch] openssl -m "Upgraded openssl with necessary changes to core code" (yes, I know it's horrid to use -m to commit, and I daily advocate against it where I work, but you get the idea, I'm sure) Isn't this how it's supposed to work? Enlighten me, and please remember that I'm drunk atm, so make it obvious ;-) -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se