Re: Notes on Using Git with Subprojects

From: Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date: Sep 26, 2006, 21:30 UTC
Message-ID: <20060926213003.GA8177@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0609261629160.9789@iabervon.org>

Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org> wrote:

Show 19 quoted lines

> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006, A Large Angry SCM wrote:
> 
> > Git, unfortunately, does not make it easy. What is wanted is to put all
> > of the subprojects in one repository and be able to checkout the various
> > parts from a local copy of the repository. The problem is, with Git, a
> > repository can have at most one working directory associated with it at
> > a time. This is because Git stores a lot of information about the
> > contents of the working directory in the repository. In fact, the usual
> > situation is that the repository, itself, is in the working directory.
> 
> There are a bunch of use cases which people see as subprojects, with 
> slightly different desires. For example, I personally don't think there's 
> any point to subprojects if a commit of the parent project doesn't specify 
> the embedded commits of each subproject (so, for example, you can use 
> bisect on the parent project to figure out which act of updating a 
> subproject broke the resulting system). AFAICT, your design doesn't handle 
> that, but uses the most recently fetched versions of all subprojects, with 
> the revision control of the parent only handling revisions in the 
> arrangement and membership of subprojects in the parent.

I agree entirely.

I have about 30 "subprojects" tacked into one large Git repository for this exact reason. In at least 5 of these cases they shouldn't be sharing a Git repository as by all rights they are different projects.

What I'm doing is sort of like tacking both the Linux kernel and glibc into the same Git repository because you might need to change and bisect over updates to the system call layer. Insane, yes. Probably shouldn't be done; but right now that interface layer between several subprojects is still in flux and it makes it rather easy to keep everything in sync.

Its annoying to perform commits to the "root project" every time the subproject changes. And it brings some complexity when you want to talk about merging that root project. But if its automated as part of "git commit" and "git merge" (either directly in those tools or by hooks users can install) then its probbaly a non issue.

-- 
Shawn.