Thank you very much! Simple and elegant! A solution that is actually better than the hypothetical mixed submodules... no overhead on maintaining several repos... On Wed, Jul 6, 2022 at 12:18 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Tue, Jul 05 2022, Sim Tov wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > here https://stackoverflow.com/q/72770397/1876484 > > > > I asked this question: > > > > I'm aware of git submodules which dwell each in its own separate directory. > > > > 1. But is there such thing as "mixed" submodules whose content is > > "merged" together? > > > > For instance: > > > > - Submodule1 (path ./), consist of files `a.txt`, `b.txt` and > > directory `C` with the file `1.txt` > > - Submodule2 (path ./), consist of files `x.txt`, `y.txt` and > > directory `C` with the file `2.txt` > > - Resulting "mixed" repo of both submodules: files `a.txt`, `b.txt`, > > `x.txt`, `y.txt` and directory `C` with the files `1.txt`, `2.txt` > > > > 2. If it is not implemented in git - is there a workaround to achieve this? > > > > Here my use case: > > > > Both submodules - independent libraries (collection of books as plain > > text files), which have same structure (directories = book > > categories). I want to present the combined parent git repository as > > full collection of books, while both projects evolve independently and > > do not overlap (in terms of file names = books). > > > > I got a very detailed and informative answer. My question now - do you > > see any other practical use cases for such a feature? Would such a > > more general case of submodules be a good feature in git or not? > > Good question, but to answer the thought experiment don't conflate > submodules with this, instead suppose that you have two branches A & B, > which have: > > A: A.txt > B: B.txt > > How will you create and maintain a third branch C which has the union of > the two? > > The answer to that question will be the same as with the submodule case, > i.e. you'd need to have some third branch that you maintain (e.g. with a > push hook?) that would be a merge of the two, and ensure that you don't > have path conflicts there. > > Then if you wanted to use such a branch as a submodule you'd grab that > down like you would any other branch. >
