Re: Why do git submodules require manual checkouts and commits?
From: Avery Pennarun <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:44:37
On 5/16/08, Johannes Schindelin [off-list ref] wrote:
On Fri, 16 May 2008, Avery Pennarun wrote: > So I think it would be very bad if the supermodule automatically > updated to the latest version of the submodule whenever you commit in > the submodule. *However*, the other way around might be fine: if you > commit in the supermodule, maybe it should commit in the submodule at > the same time and link to that specific commit. I'm pretty sure that > idea doesn't have any *fundamental* flaws, it's just got a lot of > really tricky details that need to be worked out. Just the fundamental flaw that you might _not_ want to commit that, just as you can have a dirty Makefile _forever_.
I consider that one of the annoying details rather than a fundamental flaw. I agree that it's hard to solve though. Think of it this way: I can commit, or not commit, my dirty Makefile at the same time as everything else (in a single project) with a single "git commit" line, depending on what I want to do. Things like "git commit -a" and "git add -u" speed up the common case where I just want to commit everything. But with submodules, that common case looks more like this: cd sub git checkout -b manual_branchname_because_there_was_no_default git commit -a git push etc. cd .. git commit -a git push etc. That's *really* tedious, and the number of commands multiplies when you have more than one submodule going at once. I think git's submodules are awesome because they *don't* have fundamental flaws. They just need an (optional) more automated workflow for the common case. And I'll be sure to propose one when I figure out what my common case actually is :) Have fun, Avery