Re: A design for subrepositories

> Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> writes:
> 
>> Again, the user experience is currently suboptimal.
> 
> You mentioned multiple things in your responses that you are
> planning to address, but I am wondering if the first step before
> doing anything else is to have a list of known-to-be-suboptimal
> things and publish it somewhere other people can find it.  Then
> Lauri or others may able to help code the design of the approach to
> address them for items you already have designs for, and they may
> even be able to help designing the approach for the ones you don't.

> More importantly, they do not have to waste time coming up with
> incompatible tools.  Adding "works in this scenario that is
> different from those other slightly different tools" to the mix of
> third-party tool set would fragment and confuse the user base
> ("which one of 47 different tools, all of which are incomplete,
> should I use?") and dilute developer attention.  They all at some
> point want to interact with the core side, and without an overall
> consistent design and coordination, some of their demand on the core
> side would end up being imcompatible.
> 
> The "just let .gitmodules record which branch is of interest,
> without checking out a specific commit bound to the superproject
> tree and using as a base for diff" (aka floating submodule) could be
> one of the items on the list, for example; to support it, we should
> not have to throw the entire "git submodule" with the bathwater.