git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: Avery Pennarun's git-subtree?

From
Bryan Larsen <bryan.larsen@gmail.com>
Date
Jul 23, 2010, 16:05 UTC
Message-ID
<4C49BDB7.3080805@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<4C49B0E9.1090300@web.de>
On 10-07-23 11:10 AM, Jens Lehmann wrote:
Show 29 quoted lines
> Am 22.07.2010 21:41, schrieb Avery Pennarun:
>> I create an app named myapp on github:
>>
>>     git://github.com/apenwarr/myapp
>>
>> It uses 17 different ruby gems, which I import as subprojects.  I have
>> two choices:
>>
>> [1] .gitmodules can use absolute paths to the original gem locations:
>>
>>     git://github.com/rubygems/gem[1..n]
>>
>> [2] Or else I can fork them all and use relative paths in .gitmodules:
>>
>>     ../gem[1..n]
>>     translates to -->  git://github.com/apenwarr/gem[1..n]
>
> You forgot what we do as best practice at work:
>
> [3] Fork the gem repos on github (or another server reachable by your
>      co-workers) and use those, so you don't have to change the URL
>      later:
>
>      git://github.com/apenwarrrubygems/gem[1..n]
>
> Your problems go away, setup has to be done only once on project
> start and not for every developer, you can use your own branchnames
> and you have a staging repo from where you can push patches upstream
> if necessary.

What's best practice for open source projects? I do this, but nobody except my coworkers can push to my forks, so it's a huge rigamarole just to get a fix into a submodule.

Show 8 quoted lines
>
> That is just one example. Another one is code shared between
> different repos (think: libraries) where you want to make sure that
> a bugfix in the library made in project A will make it to the shared
> code repo and thus doesn't have to be fixed again by projects B to X.
> This was one of the reasons we preferred submodules over subtrees
> in our evaluation, because there is no incentive to push fixes inside
> the subtree back to its own repo like there is when using submodules.
But you stated above that each project has its own fork of the library. 
   So there's no special incentive to push changes from the fork back to 
its master repo.
Show 13 quoted lines
>
>
>>>> It's very clear that git-submodule's current behaviour totally
>>>> mismatches the entire git philosophy.  That's why it's so impossible
>>>> to make the git-submodule command usable.
>>>
>>> That's very strong accusation.
>>
>> Agreed... but that doesn't make it wrong :)
>
> But calling a feature "impossible to make ... usable" is an
> interesting thing to say about a feature lots of people are
> using productively in their daily work, no? ;-)
In my experience, it's possible to make it usable if and only if:
1.  you have a small team
2.  all of whom are very comfortable with git
3.  changes inside submodules are either infrequent or only happen in a 
single direction
4.  the project is not public/open source

I think #4 is the killer reason why submodules don't work. It works fine if the submodule is fairly independent, but if you have a patch to the submodule that was created for and in the context of the superproject, things get really annoying really quickly.

Bryan
Previous: Jens LehmannNext: Jens Lehmann
Message 27 of 58 in “Avery Pennarun's git-subtree?”
  1. Bryan LarsenJul 21, 2010
  2. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonJul 21, 2010
  3. Avery PennarunJul 21, 2010
  4. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonJul 21, 2010
  5. Avery PennarunJul 21, 2010
  6. Avery PennarunJul 21, 2010
  7. Jens LehmannJul 21, 2010
  8. Avery PennarunJul 22, 2010
  9. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonJul 21, 2010
  10. Bryan LarsenJul 22, 2010
  11. Jakub NarebskiJul 24, 2010
  12. Avery PennarunJul 22, 2010
  13. Jonathan NiederJul 22, 2010
  14. Avery PennarunJul 22, 2010
  15. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonJul 22, 2010
  16. Avery PennarunJul 22, 2010
  17. Jens LehmannJul 23, 2010
  18. Eugene SajineJul 26, 2010
  19. Elijah NewrenJul 22, 2010
  20. Avery PennarunJul 22, 2010
  21. Chris WebbJul 23, 2010
  22. Avery PennarunJul 23, 2010
  23. Jens LehmannJul 23, 2010
  24. Avery PennarunJul 23, 2010
  25. Jens LehmannJul 23, 2010
  26. Jens LehmannJul 23, 2010
  27. Bryan LarsenJul 23, 2010
  28. Jens LehmannJul 23, 2010
  29. Bryan LarsenJul 23, 2010
  30. Avery PennarunJul 23, 2010
  31. Jens LehmannJul 25, 2010
  32. Avery PennarunJul 27, 2010
  33. Jens LehmannJul 27, 2010
  34. Marc BranchaudJul 23, 2010
  35. Avery PennarunJul 23, 2010
  36. skillzero@gmail.comJul 24, 2010
  37. Avery PennarunJul 24, 2010
  38. skillzero@gmail.comJul 24, 2010
  39. Nguyen Thai Ngoc DuyJul 25, 2010
  40. Jakub NarebskiJul 28, 2010
  41. Jakub NarebskiJul 26, 2010
  42. Marc BranchaudJul 26, 2010
  43. Linus TorvaldsJul 26, 2010
  44. Bryan LarsenJul 26, 2010
  45. Linus TorvaldsJul 26, 2010
  46. Avery PennarunJul 27, 2010
  47. Junio C HamanoJul 27, 2010
  48. Avery PennarunJul 27, 2010
  49. Junio C HamanoJul 27, 2010
  50. Jens LehmannJul 27, 2010
  51. Jakub NarebskiJul 26, 2010
  52. Avery PennarunJul 27, 2010
  53. Marc BranchaudJul 28, 2010
  54. Jakub NarebskiJul 28, 2010
  55. Sverre RabbelierJul 24, 2010
  56. Jakub NarebskiJul 26, 2010
  57. Avery PennarunJul 27, 2010
  58. Marc BranchaudJul 26, 2010

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.