Re: Avery Pennarun's git-subtree?

2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page

Re: Avery Pennarun's git-subtree?

From: Bryan Larsen <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:49:09

Using git-subtree has its warts too: I don't think for example that there is
a way to get a log _automatically excluding_ history subtree-merged
subprojects.  Or is it there?
It works exactly right for me when I used git-subtree in "squashed" 
mode.  Changes which were done in tree show up separately in the log, 
changes which were pulled in via git-subtree pull show up as a single 
summary entry in the log.

This discussion has been about how to improve git submodules, which is 
sorely needed.   However, it's quite clear that git submodules will 
never work as well as git subtrees in certain quite common situations. 
  If fixed, git submodules will be more appropriate in other situations. 
   However, I'm not asking to remove git submodules or prevent anybody 
from fixing them, I'm just asking that git subtree be merged.

Does anybody actually oppose the merger of git-subtree, which has (at 
least) hundreds of users despite its out-of-tree status?

thanks,
Bryan

Re: Avery Pennarun's git-subtree?

From: Jakub Narebski <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:49:10

Dnia czwartek 22. lipca 2010 20:23, Bryan Larsen napisał:
quoted
Using git-subtree has its warts too: I don't think for example that there is
a way to get a log _automatically excluding_ history subtree-merged
subprojects.  Or is it there?
It works exactly right for me when I used git-subtree in "squashed" 
mode.  Changes which were done in tree show up separately in the log, 
changes which were pulled in via git-subtree pull show up as a single 
summary entry in the log.

This discussion has been about how to improve git submodules, which is 
sorely needed.   However, it's quite clear that git submodules will 
never work as well as git subtrees in certain quite common situations. 
  If fixed, git submodules will be more appropriate in other situations. 
   However, I'm not asking to remove git submodules or prevent anybody 
from fixing them, I'm just asking that git subtree be merged.

Does anybody actually oppose the merger of git-subtree, which has (at 
least) hundreds of users despite its out-of-tree status?
I am very much *for* merging git-subtree into git core.  It is not that
much different from e.g. "git submodule" or "git remote" porcelain
commands.

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help