From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git submodule support feedback Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2007 14:35:46 -0700 Message-ID: <7vfy6mstsd.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <200704261238.51234.andyparkins@gmail.com> <200704262228.46864.andyparkins@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Andy Parkins X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 26 23:35:52 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 1HhBd1-0004ZD-PB for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 23:35:52 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755142AbXDZVfs (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:35:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755143AbXDZVfs (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:35:48 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao107.cox.net ([68.230.241.39]:36807 "EHLO fed1rmmtao107.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755142AbXDZVfr (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:35:47 -0400 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao107.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.05.02.00 201-2174-114-20060621) with ESMTP id <20070426213546.FQPZ1257.fed1rmmtao107.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:35:46 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id rxbm1W00b1kojtg0000000; Thu, 26 Apr 2007 17:35:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: <200704262228.46864.andyparkins@gmail.com> (Andy Parkins's message of "Thu, 26 Apr 2007 22:28:44 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Andy Parkins writes: > On Thursday 2007, April 26, Andy Parkins wrote: > >> I'll report further as I come across any stumbling blocks; but here > > The submodule support requires the latest version of git right? That's > going to cause trouble for people running different versions of git > (I've already experienced it in my own limited way - I had to upgrade > all the copies of git I have on my various computers before fetching > and pushing would work). If the repository contains a submodule > reference it effectively becomes inaccessible by a version of git > without submodule support. > > I think that we might be able to avoid that problem though - am I right > in thinking that the problem is that all the tools need teaching not to > follow the gitlink object because that hash doesn't exist in _this_ > tree it is a reference to a commit in another tree. > > Wouldn't it be better if the gitlink reference pointed at an object in > this tree which in turn referred to the submodule commit? That way the > old versions of git would still work with submodule objects in the > repository because they would just see submodules as pointing at a > blob. > > Have I oversimplified it in my head? I think older tools do not expect to find anything but tree or blob in a tree object to begin with. Now your experimental repository has a commit, which they do not expect to see and I think they will be unhappy. If you replace the commit objects in your trees with a new type of object 'gitlink', your older tools will have exactly the same problem, won't they?