hoi :)

On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 10:04:53AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
quoted text
>  - walking the *global* object list is simply not possible. You need to=
=20
quoted text
>    fsck every single subtree individually, and fsck the superproject on=
=20
quoted text
>    its own, *without* recursing into the subprojects. And you need to be=
=20
quoted text
>    able to clone the superproject and only one or two subprojects, and=20
>    never see it as one "atomic" big repository.

and just skip the unreachability check of fsck?
With this limitation a shared object store would be possible.

quoted text
> I really think people should think about the *BSD kind of "world" setup.=
=20
quoted text
> You absolutely do _not_ want supermodules to be indivisible "everything o=
r=20
quoted text
> nothign" kind of things. You want submodules to be very much separate=20
> repostories, although you *can* of course share the object store if you=
=20
quoted text
> want to (the same way git can do it between any number of totally=20
> unrelated repositories!)

You already convinced me that the "world" use-case is worthwhile.
As to *can* be shared: I'd really like to have some default location for
all objects so that it can be found automatically when you later decide
to checkout a new submodule which has not yet been fetched.

--=20
Martin Waitz