Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 12:36 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra > <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Let's compare the two alternatives: .gitmodules versus link object. >> If I want my fork of .gitmodules, I create a commit on top. > > Or you could also just edit and carry a dirty .gitmodules around for > your personal use-case. Just take the link's buffer with you everywhere. All you have to do is git edit-link <name> and paste the file's contents there, instead of opening .gitmodules directly in your editor. > And I don't see what you can do with the link objects that you cannot > do with .gitmodules. That's what it really boils down to. .gitmodules > do actually work. Your extensions would work with them too. If it came to that, you could write a huge Perl script to solve everything with a .githack. It breaks the internal symmetry of the repository, which is why git-submodule is having such a field day. I'm trying to prove, in my series, that making fundamental changes lets us get rid of a huge amount of complexity. -- 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