From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Lang Subject: Re: .gitlink for Summer of Code Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 12:54:02 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: <1174825838.12540.5.camel@localhost> <20070326220302.GH22773@admingilde.org><7vfy7rvct2.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox .net> <200703270117.59205.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Daniel Barkalow , Josef Weidendorfer , Junio C Hamano , Martin Waitz , Eric Lesh , Matthieu Moy , git@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Mar 27 23:21:05 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HWJ6G-0005tJ-W2 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 23:21:05 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965441AbXC0VVA (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 17:21:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965445AbXC0VVA (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 17:21:00 -0400 Received: from warden-p.diginsite.com ([208.29.163.248]:53193 "HELO warden.diginsite.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S965441AbXC0VU7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 17:20:59 -0400 Received: from wlvims02.diginsite.com by warden.diginsite.com via smtpd (for vger.kernel.org [209.132.176.167]) with SMTP; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 13:20:58 -0800 Received: from dlang.diginsite.com ([10.201.10.67]) by wlvims02.corp.ad.diginsite.com with InterScan Message Security Suite; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:20:26 -0700 X-X-Sender: dlang@dlang.diginsite.com In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Daniel Barkalow wrote: >> >> Are you talking about submodule history, or submodule state? If they care >> about any state but not the corresponding history, they need to do a >> shallow clone of the subproject, right? > > I don't see what the confusion is about. > > Why would you want a shallow clone, and what does that have to do with > submodules? > > I'm saying that the *normal* case is that of the thousands of submodules, > you generally care about one or two (the ones you work on). > > Those modules you want full history for. The supermodule you want because > it contains the build infrastructure. You'd generally want full history > for that too. if you are working on the submodule then you are correct. however if you are working on the supermodule it's a different story. if I'm working on the 'ubuntu superproject' it would be nice to be able to find what is different between the 'Jan 2007' and 'April 2007' versions. one could have the 2.6.19 kernel and the other would have 2.6.20. I don't care about all the individual changes between these two states of the kernel, but I need to be able to compile either one as part of my testing. If I bisect the in the superproject to the commit that updated the kernel, then I would consider getting the 'kernel subproject' history to be able to bisect the bug further (or I may just report it to the kernel maintainers for them to check. > There's absolutely zero reason to think shallow clones have *anything* to > do with this. It's a totally separate dimension. Sure, you could use > shallow clones *too*, but it has nothing to do with subprojects. they are seperate, but if you need to compile the superproject you either need to get the full history of every subproject, or you need shallow clones (or some third approach). David Lang