hoi :)

On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 02:05:33PM +0100, sf wrote:
quoted text
> >On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 01:09:49PM +0100, sf wrote:
> >>Martin Waitz wrote:
> >>>So you not only store your submodule HEAD commit in the supermodule
> >>>when you do commit to the supermodule, it also means that your
> >>>submodule HEAD will be updated when you update your supermodule.
> >>
> >>Why the magic? The typical workflow in git is
> >>
> >>1. You work on a branch, i.e. edit and commit and so on.
> >>2. At some point, you decide to share the work you did on that branch=
=20
quoted text
> >>(e-mail a patch, merge into another branch, push upstream or let it by=
=20
quoted text
> >>pulled by upstream)
> >
> >3. Other people want to use your new work.
>=20
> Sorry, if that was not obvious: You actually procceed with one of the=20
> options I listed in Step 2. What I wanted to state is that with git you=
=20
quoted text
> do not mix up committing (which is local to your repository and your=20
> branch) and publishing.

I guess you are refering to not mix up committing to the submodule and
updating the supermodule index.
These are really two separate steps, I just combined them above because I
wanted to put emphasis on the other part: it is not a one-way flow, it
is bidirectional, so your HEAD would have to changed if the supermodule
gets updated.
And I consider changing HEAD, without looking at the branch it points
to, to be a bad thing.

--=20
Martin Waitz