Chris Frey <cdfrey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I'm using git 1.6.0.4 and trying to make submodules work for me. The
> init/add/update steps are a bit tedious, but workable. The problem I have
> is when I make a change in a submodule, then git-status does not show
> the change.
My understanding is that this is exactly by design. The supermodule
tracks which commit in the subproject is bound to the tree location.
A mere act of changing something in the subproject directory is just a
single, incomplete step to create a new commit in the subproject and will
not be seen by the superproject's status. Instead of this workflow:
> cd super
> vi newsuper
> vi existing_file
> cd sub
> vi newsub
> cd ..
> git status
the submodule support is geared toward supporting this layout:
- "super" has a subproject X at "sub"
- When you do a real work on the subproject X, you do so as if
there is no supermodule. IOW, subproject X has to be able to
stand on its own.
One extreme case is you have a(nother) clone of subproject X that is
independent from "super", do the real work there and create new commit,
and update the subproject X inside "super". In such a workflow, "super"
will never see an intermediate state between commits in the subproject
directory.
--
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
