3 ms·
The basic premise is true, I've heard many wiser-than-me devs nightmare stories about submodules. But I thought the OSS world had largely moved to git subtree,
by klabb3 4y ago
The basic premise is true, I've heard many wiser-than-me devs nightmare stories about submodules. But I thought the OSS world had largely moved to git subtree, which is completely transparent for people who don't maintain the subtree folder and is supported in git for quite a while. Perhaps not?
In either case, I'd love to see a comparison to both git subtree and submodules, on a more "workflow-by-workflow" basis.
- jsmith45 4y agoThis sounds to me a lot like git-subtree combined with automation where commits to the subtree's native repository cause automation to add those commits (with path adjustments) to the super-repo, and vice versa. This keeping both sides always in sync with each other can avoid some of the downsides of git-subtree, but has its own limitations like only working when both sides are owned by the same org, does not allow a subtree that maintains "local patches", etc. If simultaneous pushes to super-repo and child repo occur at the same time, one gets applied and the other gets converted to a pull request (unclear if the server reports error back to the git client, or if the push appears to succeed, but then appears to be force pushed over by the other change, being preserved as a pull request.)