Re: Avery Pennarun's git-subtree?

[Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>]

Hi,

On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:56 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> Avery Pennarun wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately everything built *on top of* Linus's file format
>> contribution has turned out to be a disaster.
>
> Aside: this kind of statement might make it unlikely for exactly
> those who would benefit most from your opinions to read them.
>
> Well, that is my guess, anyway.  I know that I have not found the time
> to read your email (though I would like to) because I suspect based on
> such sweeping statements that it would take a while to separate the
> useful part from the rest.

I'd usually agree with such a sentiment, but I don't think it's
accurate in this case.  Having read Avery's emails in this thread, I
think he does a really good job explaining why submodules don't (and
won't) work for a lot of people.  I think he provided a better
explanation than I could have for why I've never had much luck with
submodules (and further convinced me that not only do they not work
for me now, but they aren't ever going to fulfill the usecases I had).

I can't really add much other than that we've been relatively happy
with git-subtree and would like to see it or something like it merged.
 Our problems with it so far have turned out to be issues in other
areas of git (e.g. the known issue about --prefix being ignored with
the code being merged under a different directory due to
rename-detection, and the bugs in merge-recursive's handling of D/F
changes).


Elijah