From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: .gitlink for Summer of Code Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:11:28 -0700 (PDT) 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 Cc: Josef Weidendorfer , Junio C Hamano , Martin Waitz , Eric Lesh , Matthieu Moy , git@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Barkalow X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Mar 27 23:12:01 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 1HWIxT-0001B5-7J for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 23:11:59 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965430AbXC0VLz (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 17:11:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965427AbXC0VLz (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 17:11:55 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.24]:43266 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965426AbXC0VLz (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 17:11:55 -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 l2RLBTU2013722 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:11:29 -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 l2RLBS4n027850; Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:11:28 -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, 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