Re: [Libguestfs] 1.39 proposal: Let's split up the libguestfs git repo and tarballs

On Monday, 10 June 2019 17:35:52 CEST Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > So while I'm not a massive fan of git submodules, now that I have used > them a few times with riscv stuff, they do solve a certain problem as > long as they are managed carefully. I think the common code and the > generator are cases where a submodule or two would work. TBH I've always found submodules tricky and problematic to use: - they are fixed to a certain revision (so no way to dynamically follow the branch of another repo) - the URL is the same for all the users, meaning you cannot reuse the same authenticated/secure protocols that your repo has - they create a certain burden when switching to a tag/branch/commit whose revision of a submodule is different than what is at the current branch - even more problematic when switching commit, and in the old commit a subdirectory is a real directory while in the latest HEAD is a submodule (or viceversa)

> Does this mean we need to move immediately to a submodule if just > splitting virt-p2v, or copy code as you suggest? Maybe not, because > you can imagine for just this project copying the code needed from the > common/ directory, and creating a new "mini-generator" for the project > which handles the little bits that need to be generated in virt-p2v. I'm actually solving in a different way, i.e. avoiding altogether the generator for p2v stuff.