Martin Waitz wrote:
quoted text
> hoi :)
> 
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 02:21:20PM +0100, sf wrote:
>> I just had a short (really short) look at your work. My impression is 
>> that your repository setup is much too complicated.
> 
> Well, I'm not really satisfied with the UI part.
> What exactly do you find complicated?

I am not talking about the UI. On the contrary, I am talking about the 
repository, i.e. the directories and files on your disk and their 
contents. You add a lot of additional information to the repository that 
is not needed at all.

quoted text
>> As I proposed elsewhere: For submodules to work you only need to allow 
>> commits in tree objects (that is what your implementation requires as 
>> well). Everything else is in the tools. Much simpler.
> 
> I do not quite get your point.
> The core of my work allows to put commits into tree objects.

That is fine.

quoted text
> Then there is some more (but not quite finished) work to make the tools
> work together with submodules.  So no, not everything is there yet.

And what is already there is a lot of meta information (see above). You 
do not need that.

For example, in the index, if it is a commit (i.e. a subproject), store 
the commit id (not the commit's tree id ). Make the tools handle this 
case (as yet, all code expects only trees and blobs when they parse 
trees). Especially, extend update-index to be able to store a commit 
instead of the tree.

Or else, do not change what is recorded in the index. Then, at commit 
time, you not only commit the superproject but also all subprojects.

Or allow both.

Anyway, you can create commits in tree objects. See, you did not need to 
  store any additional information in the repository.

To push and pull you have to extend the tools as well. That is the next 
step.

Regards

Stephan

-- 
b.i.t.
beratungsgesellschaft f