From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: .gitlink for Summer of Code Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 01:31:41 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <1174825838.12540.5.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Mar 28 01:31:43 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 1HWL8g-0001Zb-TX for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 01:31:43 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933452AbXC0Xbk (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 19:31:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S933473AbXC0Xbk (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 19:31:40 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:56739 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933452AbXC0Xbj (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Mar 2007 19:31:39 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HWL7b-0008LE-R7 for git@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 01:30:35 +0200 Received: from host-89-229-25-173.torun.mm.pl ([89.229.25.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 01:30:35 +0200 Received: from jnareb by host-89-229-25-173.torun.mm.pl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 28 Mar 2007 01:30:35 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-89-229-25-173.torun.mm.pl Mail-Copies-To: Jakub Narebski User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: David Lang wrote: > 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. I'd rather call this idea _sparse_ clone (not shallow), as you have only some points in the history, but they don't need to be top 'n' ones. -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git