Re: Notes on Subproject Support

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Jan 28, 2006, 21:43 UTC
Message-ID: <7vfyn8t4e5.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <200601280455.k0S4tx6N003251@laptop11.inf.utfsm.cl>

Horst von Brand <vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl> writes:

> One thing that has bugged me from the beginning of this, and which does
> come out of your example: Why only project/subproject? In your example, you
> have the kernel (OK(ish)) and "rest of the world",...

Because I presented the example badly, perhaps?

There is nothing that prevents you from having more "bind" lines than the example showed, to have one project that works with N subprojects. In fact, the examples in earlier threads used a project with the kernel and gcc subprojects -- I just felt it was so obvious you can do N subprojects instead of just one, so used just one subproject in the latest round of example for the sake of brevity.

And there is nothing that prevents you from having "bind" lines in the subproject commit objects, either.

The structure the lower level objects support with the "bound commit" extension is not about "project vs subproject". You can express "project that has subprojects each of which has subsubprojects".

Now, it is totally a separate issue that anybody sane would want to keep track of such structure, or we would be better off leaving it to build infrastructure specific to each toplevel project, as argued by some earlier.