[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       git
Subject:    Re: Submodules implementation
From:       Christoph Bartoschek <bartoschek () gmx ! de>
Date:       2010-02-24 0:15:53
Message-ID: 201002240115.53771.bartoschek () gmx ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Mittwoch 24 Februar 2010 schrieb Avery Pennarun:

> The data format itself implements submodules as simply pointers to
> commits (not trees) located at a particular point in the supermodule.
> This is very elegant and simple.

I see that in the submodule there is a .git directory with its own objects.  
This does not look like as if the submodule objects are part of the 
superproject.

> By comparison, my git-subtree tool
> (http://github.com/apenwarr/git-subtree) is the opposite: its data
> storage format isn't very elegant (it just has a tree stored inside
> another tree, as if there were no submodule at all) but its
> implementation makes it easier for end users (since they don't have to
> deal with separate repositories).

This is exaclty how I would expect it. The tree of the submodule has its root 
somewhere in the tree of the superproject. Then there are commits for the 
superproject that point to the root of the whole tree and commits for the 
submodules that point to nodes in the tree.
A combined tree looks much more elegant for me.

I'll take a look at your tool.

Christop
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]