From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Lehmann Subject: Re: Project structure of .NET-Projects using git submodule or something different Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2012 21:29:50 +0100 Message-ID: <4F29A0BE.8000803@web.de> References: <002401cce069$75ecc1a0$61c644e0$@heigl-online.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Harald Heigl X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Feb 01 21:29:59 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RsgoX-0004gq-Kw for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2012 21:29:58 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754944Ab2BAU3x (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2012 15:29:53 -0500 Received: from fmmailgate03.web.de ([217.72.192.234]:43481 "EHLO fmmailgate03.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754697Ab2BAU3w (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Feb 2012 15:29:52 -0500 Received: from moweb001.kundenserver.de (moweb001.kundenserver.de [172.19.20.114]) by fmmailgate03.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F3D41B0940D9 for ; Wed, 1 Feb 2012 21:29:51 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([91.3.200.120]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb002) with ESMTPA (Nemesis) id 0LjJaZ-1SQwMa04Z5-00dE9i; Wed, 01 Feb 2012 21:29:51 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1 In-Reply-To: <002401cce069$75ecc1a0$61c644e0$@heigl-online.at> X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:m2RYuwgibWLMaf3yaGZuBVOEfCQDYLhAX0pO6gKLFo8 1Q89/N7Jo6TfZGYM6Wh7mmw7XdXIPoagZ7VqlNhqI81Sxop6yG hS2MKDDlB6TMofyCDHGQCSeGQSIqtnGQKCquKJm+rbLdEEyWXR jqYCg8lf6hfwSTvEOIKndWRXrZUf7zL9W6AV1N3jMZl6mKncuS getuuujfjQAyLci2qGb/g== Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 31.01.2012 23:41, schrieb Harald Heigl: > Let's assume following Project structure (Dependencies and Subdependencies > are submodules and submodules of the submodules) > Project > Dependency 1 > Dependency 2 > Dependency 3 > Dependency 4 > Dependency 2 > > > The problem is if I want to build them I need to build 2+3, then 1, 4 and 2 > again and then the project. As you may see project 2 is a submodule of > dependency 1 and also of project. I don't feel comfortable with this setup. > What do you think? Hmm, we try to avoid that kind of setup as having checked out different versions of the "Dependency 2" submodule could have rather surprising effects. We get along really well with "Dependency 2" only being present in the superproject and having "Dependency 1" reference that instead of having its own copy (So we have submodules which are depending on having other submodules right next to them). Then the superproject is responsible for tying it all together.