On Saturday 02 December 2006 21:58, Martin Waitz wrote: > So I was not against the link object itself (initially I wanted to do it > this way, too), only agains the information which was proposed to be > stored there. Up to now I haven't found anything which makes sense to > store next to the submodule commit to define the identity of the > submodule. Isn't it enough reason that a porcelain probably wants to store meta information for a given submodule, giving the need to put a name/identity to it? Josef - 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