# Submodule usability 3 messages from 2007-09-29 to 2007-09-29. Participants: Daniel Barkalow, Sam Ravnborg. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/10077 ## Daniel Barkalow, 2007-09-29 17:24 Subject: Submodule usability Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/Pine.LNX.4.64.0709291302240.5926%40iabervon.org ``` Would it be feasible in general to have "git status" cascade into submodules if they're checked out? As it is now, in a project with submodules, a "git commit -a" at the top can create a commit that lacks changes that are in the working tree and aren't mentioned to the user at all, which is a sure recipe for a stream of "add the change I forgot to add last time" follow-up commits. While I'm on that topic, I think I want an "includesfile" config option that specifies patterns that should never be present untracked (but only as per-user configuration, since I think that's exclusively a matter of personal taste). I'll probably code this up myself unless I've missed somebody else doing it already. My first guess at effect is -a adds them, and they appear as "not added" in the "modified" section of status output instead of the "untracked" section. Also, would it be reasonable to have a gitmodules option for submodules that the supermodule doesn't make sense without? E.g., multiple projects are now using kbuild as their build system, so, in order to share improvements to kbuild between projects, it would be useful to have it as a submodule. But, by default, the kernel wouldn't come with its build system any more, which would be a pain. So have a tracked option for the submodule that says that, when checking out the superproject, this particular subproject should be updated automatically. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank* ``` ## Sam Ravnborg, 2007-09-29 18:52 Subject: Re: Submodule usability Message-ID: <20070929185238.GB19943@uranus.ravnborg.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20070929185238.GB19943%40uranus.ravnborg.org In-Reply-To: ``` Hi Daniel On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 01:24:53PM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > Also, would it be reasonable to have a gitmodules option for submodules > that the supermodule doesn't make sense without? E.g., multiple projects > are now using kbuild as their build system, Out of couriosity... I know of busybox and klibc. Are there any others using kbuild these days? I see that several build system share some ideas with kbuild which I btw am glad to see. But if there are enough project taking benefit of kbuild I should maybe revisit my idea to factor out all the common stuff somehow. Sam ``` ## Daniel Barkalow, 2007-09-29 19:02 Subject: Re: Submodule usability Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/Pine.LNX.4.64.0709291453410.5926%40iabervon.org In-Reply-To: <20070929185238.GB19943@uranus.ravnborg.org> ``` On Sat, 29 Sep 2007, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > Hi Daniel > On Sat, Sep 29, 2007 at 01:24:53PM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > > > Also, would it be reasonable to have a gitmodules option for submodules > > that the supermodule doesn't make sense without? E.g., multiple projects > > are now using kbuild as their build system, > > Out of couriosity... > I know of busybox and klibc. > Are there any others using kbuild these days? > > I see that several build system share some ideas with kbuild > which I btw am glad to see. > But if there are enough project taking benefit of kbuild I should > maybe revisit my idea to factor out all the common stuff somehow. I'm only sure of busybox and klibc (3 including the kernel is "multiple"), but IIRC a number of linux-specific userspace projects seem awfully similar. I wouldn't be surprised if the build systems that currently share only ideas would share code if it were factored out. -Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank* ```