From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jan Hudec Subject: Re: Is there any plan to support partial checkout or submoudule improvement? Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:33:59 +0200 Message-ID: <20071016213359.GJ26127@efreet.light.src> References: <20071016115310.5FB957E6D@mail.kooxoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="AzNpbZlgThVzWita" Cc: 'Johannes Schindelin' , 'Lars Hjemli' , git@vger.kernel.org To: franky X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 16 23:34:46 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 1Ihu3p-0005rs-Ux for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:34:46 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965648AbXJPVeM (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 17:34:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965718AbXJPVeL (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 17:34:11 -0400 Received: from ns1.bluetone.cz ([212.158.128.13]:46786 "EHLO ns1.bluetone.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965601AbXJPVeJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 17:34:09 -0400 Received: from localhost (spamhole.bluetone.cz [192.168.13.2]) by ns1.bluetone.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0A215739C; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:34:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from ns1.bluetone.cz ([192.168.13.1]) by localhost (spamhole.bluetone.cz [192.168.13.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id kQnoEJVcC8co; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:34:03 +0200 (CEST) Received: from efreet.light.src (145-119-207-85.strcechy.adsl-llu.static.bluetone.cz [85.207.119.145]) by ns1.bluetone.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8281E5731D; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:34:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from bulb by efreet.light.src with local (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1Ihu35-0002Jn-8l; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:33:59 +0200 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20071016115310.5FB957E6D@mail.kooxoo.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-11) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: --AzNpbZlgThVzWita Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Oct 16, 2007 at 19:53:08 +0800, franky wrote: > > You are talking as if your partial checkout was a project in its own > > right. Then make it so. Do not use a partial checkout, but make that a > > submodule. >=20 > As I said in the first email, the submodule way suffers from the multiple > commit problem: src and bin as two submodules of project, three commits (= for > the 3 dirs separately) are needed when src directory changes and compiled > binaries being put in bin directory. It's annoying to have to give 3 comm= it > logs. Thinking about it, it's only two commits -- src can be a submodule, but bin a normal directory (you can choose not to check out subprojects during repository checkout). This has the advantage, that bin, even when src is not checked out, always knows what version of src it is based on (it's in the gitlink) and you only give two commit messages. Now I would actually say that commiting bin independently is better. It allows you to commit sources more often (eg. if you are doing series of small fixes) and more flexibility for branching (you don't want to merge binaries). --=20 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec --AzNpbZlgThVzWita Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFHFS5HRel1vVwhjGURAt8EAJoCCuXI2z85HduNqIHRaN3g4jt45gCgu+ev FjChpWZkXkvlZ4rE6h9r/OU= =QvpY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --AzNpbZlgThVzWita--