Re: [GSoC][PATCH v2] merge-strategies.adoc: detail submodule merge
- From
D. Ben Knoble <ben.knoble@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 24, 2025, 17:31 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CALnO6CC+7fPjD5f_LZ1PFavdpKqAjMDmrFL8azwatYpS=+pODg@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqa5ad8vzf.fsf@gitster.g>
On Sat, Feb 22, 2025 at 5:18 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 32 quoted lines
> > Lucas Seiki Oshiro <lucasseikioshiro@gmail.com> writes: > > >> And of course a 6-line paragraph is not large enough to put in a > >> separate file to be included. > > > > I'm a newbie here, so I can't have a strong opinion on what's > > the best solution for managing those files. But, given that: > > > > 1. `ort` will sometime replace `recursive` > > 2. the last change in the content of this document was in > > f5a3c5e637, three years ago, basically copying the content > > from `recursive` to `ort` > > > > it looks like to me that creating another file only for this > > paragraph would harder to maintain than that duplication. > > > > I mean, if eventually `recursive` is replaced by `ort`, one > > will need to remember to move this paragraph to > > `merge-strategies`, as it will be used only in the `ort` > > documentation. On the other hand, given that this document > > haven't changed since the introduction of `ort`, this > > duplication doesn't seem to me that will be hard to be > > managed. > > A relatively easy way out would be to have the full warning in the > 'ort' section, and then only add only something like > > For a path that is a submodule, the same caution as 'ort' > applies to this strategy. > > to the 'recursive' section.
Indeed, that seems preferable to me (based on a similar conversation about a different documentation change in another project [1]).
[1]: https://github.com/racket/racket/pull/5144#issuecomment-2563172012
-- D. Ben Knoble