From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: [RFC] Submodules in GIT Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 01:42:22 +0100 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <20061120215116.GA20736@admingilde.org> <7v7ixp20za.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v4pstzmk5.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 00:41:20 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 35 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-81-190-24-209.torun.mm.pl Mail-Copies-To: jnareb@gmail.com User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GmJhJ-0000hm-9U for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2006 01:41:14 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030579AbWKUAlJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Nov 2006 19:41:09 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030583AbWKUAlJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Nov 2006 19:41:09 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:36550 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030579AbWKUAlI (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Nov 2006 19:41:08 -0500 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GmJh8-0000f5-JT for git@vger.kernel.org; Tue, 21 Nov 2006 01:41:02 +0100 Received: from host-81-190-24-209.torun.mm.pl ([81.190.24.209]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2006 01:41:02 +0100 Received: from jnareb by host-81-190-24-209.torun.mm.pl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 21 Nov 2006 01:41:02 +0100 To: git@vger.kernel.org Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano wrote: > Linus Torvalds writes: > >> Now, to get everything to work seamlessly within such a commit thing >> might be a fair amount of work, but I'm not sure you even _need_ to. It >> might be ok to just say "subproject 'xyzzy' differs" in the diff, for >> example, and have some rudimentary support for "git status" etc talking >> about subprojects that need to be committed. > > I agree with the static "diff" part, and probably "checkout" and > "merge" are not all that difficult. > > However, if I recall correctly, it was rather nightmarish to > make this also work for reachability traversal necessary for > pack generation. It was painful enough even when the bind was > at the commit level (which was way simpler to handle), but to do > this the right way, the bind needs to be done at the tree level, > and "rev-list --objects foo..bar" would need some way to limit > the commit ancestry chain of subproject at the same time, by > computing the commit ancestry of the embedded commits in the > trees. Perhaps it would be best to join those two subproject support solutions together: "bind" tree/commit mount header in commit object, and "commit" entry in a tree. But I agree that revision walking needs to be rewamped... well, unless you always have project and subproject in the same repository, and subprojects are branches in the project too... -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git