From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Lehmann Subject: Re: RFC: Making submodules "track" branches Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 09:15:53 +0200 Message-ID: <4C0F3FA9.7000800@web.de> References: <201006080912.31448.johan@herland.net> <4C0E6A8A.70608@web.de> <7vbpblruj8.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Johan Herland , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=C6var_Arnfj=F6r=F0?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_Bjarmason?= , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 09 09:17:26 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OMFXL-0005ZR-5V for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 09:17:19 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753369Ab0FIHRN convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jun 2010 03:17:13 -0400 Received: from fmmailgate02.web.de ([217.72.192.227]:42083 "EHLO fmmailgate02.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751706Ab0FIHRN (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jun 2010 03:17:13 -0400 Received: from smtp02.web.de ( [172.20.0.184]) by fmmailgate02.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0F361654A591; Wed, 9 Jun 2010 09:15:53 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [80.128.93.210] (helo=[192.168.178.26]) by smtp02.web.de with asmtp (WEB.DE 4.110 #4) id 1OMFVx-0006ul-00; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 09:15:53 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; de; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 In-Reply-To: <7vbpblruj8.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-Sender: Jens.Lehmann@web.de X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/guIpgNokUDFrUwwNmxdg9y0nX+kp5aQDpFAF3 sLpAgCkfybtAtTqcTZ4Te8wQWXFdGQzXCWkWHBhc7Vgkcnrz6Q I8Vr6qIkzyQ52SrSDyiw== Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 09.06.2010 01:09, schrieb Junio C Hamano: > Jens Lehmann writes: >=20 >> Don't record a commit in the first place, following a branch is not = bound >> to a special commit, so pretending to do that might do more harm tha= n good. >> Just putting the 0-hash there might be the solution. >=20 > Ugh. Even though I understand that in some scenarios you would want = to > say "I don't care what commit is used for this submodule---just use t= he > tip of the branch 'fred'", I don't think you want to use 0{40} in the > superproject. I think it would be Ok to add such a note to .gitmodul= es in > the superproject, but I also think we should still record which _exac= t_ > commit was used to test and validate such a commit in the superprojec= t > when it was made. I think we are in violent agreement here. But I as far as understood th= e always-tip mode (and I might be wrong here as I never used something li= ke SVN Externals) it is intended to not be able to tell which exact versio= n of the submodules branch was used. Otherwise you could just update the branch in the submodule and commit that in the superproject, which is w= hat people do not seem to want (please correct me if I am wrong). Under this assumption it seems to me that it doesn't make sense to reco= rd anything but 0{40}, as this tells people "this submodule was somewhere = at the tip of , but we can't say where exactly"). Or maybe don't a= dd the submodule to the tree at all, like =C6var proposed. Same outcome, m= aybe even easier to do. But I always have the feeling there is something I don't get when peopl= e talk about the always-tip mode, so maybe the potential users of such a feature should speak up now.