Jens Lehmann <> writes:

> Again, the user experience is currently suboptimal.

You mentioned multiple things in your responses that you are
planning to address, but I am wondering if the first step before
doing anything else is to have a list of known-to-be-suboptimal
things and publish it somewhere other people can find it.  Then
Lauri or others may able to help code the design of the approach to
address them for items you already have designs for, and they may
even be able to help designing the approach for the ones you don't.

More importantly, they do not have to waste time coming up with
incompatible tools.  Adding "works in this scenario that is
different from those other slightly different tools" to the mix of
third-party tool set would fragment and confuse the user base
("which one of 47 different tools, all of which are incomplete,
should I use?") and dilute developer attention.  They all at some
point want to interact with the core side, and without an overall
consistent design and coordination, some of their demand on the core
side would end up being imcompatible.

The "just let .gitmodules record which branch is of interest,
without checking out a specific commit bound to the superproject
tree and using as a base for diff" (aka floating submodule) could be
one of the items on the list, for example; to support it, we should
not have to throw the entire "git submodule" with the bathwater.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to