Am 30.07.2017 um 03:37 schrieb R0b0t1:
> On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 3:49 AM, Joachim Durchholz <j...@durchholz.org>
wrote:
>> Am 29.07.2017 um 05:20 schrieb R0b0t1:
>>> They behave more like a tracked file and are fairly opaque.
>>
>> Actually they behave like a directory with *untracked* files.
>
> Everything in them is untracked in relation to the main repo, but you
> can specify a tag for the submodule that refers to a point in time for
> the referenced repository.
Nitpick: The submodule references a commit in the referenced repository,
not a point in time.
Major: The commit reference is not optional as you seem to indicate, it
is mandatory.
> In a sense the specified tag is like the
> contents of a file.
Aside: The submodule reference uses a commit id, not a tag. This is
important because submodules won't follow if the referenced module
changes the tag, as happens routinely with HEAD.
The docs are maddeningly imprecise over this, the clearest statement I
found were on https://git.github.io/rev_news/2016/01/13/edition-11/ .
I don't know what you mean with "the tag is like the contents of a
file". I'd rather say it's like a hardlink.
> I don't understand how I've been arrogant.
I seem to have reached the end of my ability and willingness to help you
understand the issues surrounding your behaviour, so I'm stopping that
part of the discussion.
You could try and switch sides, adding enough work to a project that you
get the kind of criticism you've been writing here; it's possible that
you will understand then.
Regards
Jo
