This 'solves' the submodule problem by just copying everything, as far as I can tell. A few big differences from submodules: With X-modules, you have all the

This 'solves' the submodule problem by just copying everything, as far as I can tell. A few big differences from submodules: With X-modules, you have all the code in your repo, vs. a reference to the other repo. If you are looking at submodules to manage repo size, this solution is not for you. With X-modules, you are tracking a branch, not a revision. If you want to pin an external dependency, it's not clear that you can do that with an X-module (the screencast doesn't show it, I don't think). X-modules require an extra application to manage the repo relationships. There's a command-line client, but it's listed as unsupported on their website. It's not clear what the auth story is around who can make these changes. It doesn't look like adding an X-module would be subject to code review. Personally, I'm not interested in this at all. I don't think it's a bad product, but I wonder what problems it actually solves. I don't know how common the submodule pattern is to compose a monorepo like they've demonstrated, not in an 'enterprise' setting they hint at future pricing for, anyway. And it's not clear to me whether their sync pattern is going to be OK for external third-party dependencies, unless you want to actually track their changes automatically vs. being intentional about when you pull in changes; this seems like a supply chain issue to me.