From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2006 02:12:24 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC] Submodules in GIT
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612151809510.3557@woody.osdl.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0612151747470.3849@woody.osdl.org>



On Fri, 15 Dec 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> 
> On Sat, 16 Dec 2006, Torgil Svensson wrote:
> > 
> > 100644 blob <sha1 of blob>    README
> > 100644 blob <sha1 of blob>    REPORTING-BUGS
> > 100644 link <sha1 of blob>     <sha1 of commit>
> > 040000 tree <sha1 of tree>    arch
> > 040000 tree <sha1 of tree>    block
> > 040000 link <sha1 of tree>     <sha1 of commit>
> 
> That 040000 needs to be something else.

Side note: that's not to say that I would really see why you'd want to 
have both the tree and the commit SHA1's, and why you seemingly think that 
the links don't need a filename. Hmm?

If you require the tree objects to be in the database, you might as well 
require that the commit object be there. But you could make rules that say 
that subprojects don't need the whole commit history, for example (which 
is just a shallow clone in the subproject).