From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: Why do git submodules require manual checkouts and commits? Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 14:58:21 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <2729632a0805152116o3c998324xb401674207dd2e1e@mail.gmail.com> <32541b130805160643y3bfe609et22b2d00627f98c04@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: "skillzero@gmail.com" , git@vger.kernel.org To: Avery Pennarun X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri May 16 15:59:20 2008 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 1Jx0Sh-0005Ee-MK for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 16 May 2008 15:59:08 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751071AbYEPN6R (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 May 2008 09:58:17 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750887AbYEPN6R (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 May 2008 09:58:17 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:55742 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750758AbYEPN6Q (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 May 2008 09:58:16 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 16 May 2008 13:58:14 -0000 Received: from R4f5c.r.pppool.de (EHLO racer.local) [89.54.79.92] by mail.gmx.net (mp022) with SMTP; 16 May 2008 15:58:14 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19HhSJnzbdH6ZRsW894ro4EUy2P/QxErm4AsP9o/2 8TmyOD8QZnbBuM X-X-Sender: gene099@racer In-Reply-To: <32541b130805160643y3bfe609et22b2d00627f98c04@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Fri, 16 May 2008, Avery Pennarun wrote: > So I think it would be very bad if the supermodule automatically > updated to the latest version of the submodule whenever you commit in > the submodule. *However*, the other way around might be fine: if you > commit in the supermodule, maybe it should commit in the submodule at > the same time and link to that specific commit. I'm pretty sure that > idea doesn't have any *fundamental* flaws, it's just got a lot of > really tricky details that need to be worked out. Just the fundamental flaw that you might _not_ want to commit that, just as you can have a dirty Makefile _forever_. Ciao, Dscho