From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] status&commit: Teach them to show commits of modified submodules. Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2007 09:51:43 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <1194722863-14741-1-git-send-email-pkufranky@gmail.com> <7vabpliz13.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <46dff0320711102218h259199e3g2b4a4d3b73202cdb@mail.gmail.com> <7vhcjscyhu.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <47380019.1000704@viscovery.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Junio C Hamano , Yin Ping , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Sixt X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Nov 12 10:52:33 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IrVxy-0002TN-Lb for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 12 Nov 2007 10:52:27 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756120AbXKLJwL (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 04:52:11 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756088AbXKLJwK (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 04:52:10 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:37618 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1756084AbXKLJwI (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Nov 2007 04:52:08 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 12 Nov 2007 09:52:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO openvpn-client) [138.251.11.103] by mail.gmx.net (mp049) with SMTP; 12 Nov 2007 10:52:04 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18SHvYe81ES9uh1RgdLxYbYtDgXITEt2hxtljN6A1 joIhXjqc92ke6z X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <47380019.1000704@viscovery.net> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, Johannes Sixt wrote: > Junio C Hamano schrieb: > > > I am not saying that it is wrong to use submodule to track such groups > > of source trees whose versions are very closely tied together. At > > least not yet. > > In KDE, the supermodule will actually just be a container that binds the > submodules together. The essential development will happen in the > submodules, and the supermodule will receive a commit quite frequently. > In this case, there will often be only a few or a few dozen commits > listed, and I anticipate that the integrator who is going to make the > commit (to the supermodule) will probably like the summary. So I'm all > for it. I like it, too. And we can make the number of shown commits configurable, just like for the merge summary. But I'd rather see the code in wt-status.c than in git-submodule.sh. Ciao, Dscho