On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, Daniel Barkalow wrote:I don't know about "ever", but yes, I do think submodule commits are generally totally separate things from supermodule commits. That certainly works, although I'm not convinved that it's necessarily a hugely important detail. I suspect there may well be more important things UI-wise wrt submodules than the "you may have to commit submodules separately" question. For example, doing a "git pull" is a lot more interesting, since that actually has the potential of having to resolve conflicts in submodules before the supermodule can be committed. Getting all the "git reset" behaviour right for when you decide "oops, that was too complicated" is probably a lot more important than whether you have to have a separate "commit subproject" phase for the simple cases of doing a bog-standard "git commit -a". Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Davide Libenzi | [patch 7/8] fdmap v2 - implement sys_socket2 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 018/196] coda: convert struct class_device to struct device |
| Bart Van Assche | Integration of SCST in the mainstream Linux kernel |
| David Newall | Re: Slow DOWN, please!!! |
git: | |
| Christoph Lameter | Network latency regressions from 2.6.22 to 2.6.29 |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Arjan van de Ven | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 27/37] dccp: Integration of dynamic feature activation - part 2 (server side) |
