Re: .gitlink for Summer of Code

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Cc: Josef Weidendorfer <Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de>,
	Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>,
	Martin Waitz <tali@admingilde.org>, Eric Lesh <eclesh@ucla.edu>,
	Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>,
	git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: .gitlink for Summer of Code
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:11:28 -0700 (PDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703271409070.6730@woody.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0703271602110.6485@iabervon.org>

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.

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.

		Linus