Open Stack

On 08/21/2013 12:29 PM, Mac Innes, Kiall wrote:
> On 21/08/13 19:48, Boris Pavlovic wrote:
>> So why submodules are terrible and oslo-sync is good?=)

Hi!

I'm on a plane and landing, so I'm going to be brief:

submodules are off the table for the time being due to tooling
constraints. For any of our repos to use submodules, even if we decided
it was a good idea, we'd need to teach zuul and gerrit-git-prep about
them. This is pretty much not going to happen before the summit.

SO - how about we table for now, since it's a moot point, and have a
summit session about it if people still want to explore. That said ...

> I think the biggest mistake people make with submodules, which oslo's
> sync avoids, is "dropping commits" / Going backwards / Switching
> branches on submodule - or worse - pointing at a detached commit.
> ...
> Getting developers - the hundreds of developers involved in OpenStack -
> to understand and appreciate this issue, and about 50 other issues, is
> not time spent well. Time that will need to be spent over and over again
> as OpenStack gains more and more developers.

This is the main point I'm worried about. submodules are tricky and
experienced git devs can get easily confused. We have over a thousand
devs, many of them very new to git. We also don't allow merge commits,
not because git merges are bad, but because the implications of them in
our code review context is particular complex and I don't think the
complexity is worth it.