From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Submodule object store Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 12:59:22 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20070326220302.GH22773@admingilde.org> <7vfy7rvct2.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20070326231637.GJ22773@admingilde.org> <7vy7ljtwir.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20070326233603.GL22773@admingilde.org> <20070327112549.GA12178@informatik.uni-freiburg.de> <20070327115029.GC12178@informatik.uni-freiburg.de> <20070327155306.GQ22773@admingilde.org> <20070327172216.GA24200@informatik.uni-freiburg.de> <20070327194233.GA28229@informatik.uni-freiburg.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Martin Waitz , Junio C Hamano , Josef Weidendorfer , Eric Lesh , Matthieu Moy , git@vger.kernel.org To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Uwe_Kleine-K=F6nig?= X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Mar 27 22:00:20 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 1HWHq8-0001Ua-6j for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 22:00:20 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965310AbXC0UAP (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:00:15 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965059AbXC0UAP (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:00:15 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:40713 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965310AbXC0UAN (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 16:00:13 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id l2RJxNU2011760 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 12:59:23 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id l2RJxMPM026466; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 12:59:22 -0700 In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.468 required=5 tests=AWL X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.119__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.177 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 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: > > In other words, I don't think that's an argument for or against sharing > the object database. You should *always* be able to share the object > database by setting GIT_OBJECT_DIR if you want (or by using alternates). > But that's independent of whether you are a sub/supermodule.. In fact, I suspect that you might well have a situation where there are more objects to be shared "across" superproject boundaries than within them. For example, say that I'm a mirror site, and I mirror two different distributions, both of which use superprojects (but *different* superprojects!) to track their distro stuff. Obviously, the top-level setup is likely totally different, and they probably differ a bit in which subprojects they have too, but in many cases, those two *different* superprojects will have subprojects that could often share 99% of all their objects not within the superproject, but individually *across* superprojects. So you would not want to have a object store that is tied to the superproject, but you might well want to have each superproject share the object store for the subprojects that they have in common. The "kernel" subproject in the "ubuntu" superproject might want to share the object store for the "linux-2.6" subproject in the Fedora 7 superproject. (Similarly, there migh be sharing with totally *individual* projects, ie you might want to make both just have an alternate that points directly to the "official" tree that is in neither of the two superprojects and that I maintain separately). Linus