On Monday 21 May 2007, Martin Waitz wrote:
> hoi :)
>
> On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 12:06:47AM +0200, Johan Herland wrote:
> > For the high-level concept, "subproject" seems to me the best
> > alternative. I think it is much better than "submodule" at
> > describing that the subproject is a stand-alone project/repo in
> > itself.
>
> it may be developed independently but for the sake of the more important
> bigger ("the top level project") it really is only one small part.
> That and the fact that "module" is already an established term
> in software makes me prefer "submodule".
> For me the project is always the top-level one: the project you
> currently work for.
"The project you currently work for" depends on your POV. But I agree
that using the term "project" alone might be confusing. That's why I'd
rather talk about "superproject" and "subproject". That way, there's
no ambiguity at all.
> > As for the low-level concept, I personally prefer "gitlink", but
> > I don't have any strong feelings. The fact that "gitlink" seems
> > to already be used in the code (as in resolve_gitlink_ref() etc.),
> > coupled with "dirlink" being somewhat ambiguous (i.e. may also be
> > interpreted as "(sym)link to directory") makes the case for me.
>
> The only problem I have with gitlink is that there already was
> a lot of discussion about some entirely different "gitlink", so
> choosing a different name is not that bad.
> Aside from that I prefer gitlink, too.
The term "gitlink" is ambiguous/confusing? I didn't know. What's the
other meaning of gitlink?
(Unless you're talking about gitlink as in "gitlink:git[7]" which
appears all over our asciidoc documentation, but I don't think that
counts...)
Have fun!
...Johan
--
Johan Herland, <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx>
www.herland.net
-
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
