On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 10:12 PM, Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 3:12 AM, Sitaram Chamarty <sitaramc@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > As I understand the documentation (and past emails, snippets > > of IRC traffic, etc) git subtree will help me do precisely > > what I want -- a simple way to deal with this all-too-common > > SVN-ism. If not "simple", at least > > > > - simpler than submodules, and > > > > - no need for advance planning [1] about what parts will > > be subprojects. > > Well, I don't know that I'd go so far as to advise against advance > planning :) But git subtree does make it easy for you to change your > mind later, that much is true. Agreed, and that's good enough for me. > You might still have some troubles if you rename subdirectories a lot; > perhaps I don't understand it correctly, but the so-called file > move/rename detection in git doesn't seem to be implemented > everywhere. If you extract the history of a subdirectory that was > previously renamed, you'll get only the history since it was renamed. > (Which might be fine with you. You can certainly still merge it back > in afterwards.) Did not know this; thanks -- will keep an eye out. > Also, git-subtree might have bugs yet. Watch out for that :) :) > git-subtree is certainly easier to use than filter-branch, IMHO. Plus > it helps you merge things back in afterwards, which filter-branch > doesn't particularly. All in all it does look like it will fulfill my purposes. I will probably use it myself a bit before telling people to use it of course. Thanks, Sitaram -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html