2

I'm maintaining a repo of a CMS/framework which currently uses quite a few (25) submodules. Due to all the downsides of submodules, I'd rather switch to Avery Pennarun's git-subtree (note: not the git subtree merge strategy), but I'm hesitant at this point, as i wonder if git-subtree is really stable in a "large repo/lots of subtrees/deeply nested/lots of flux" scenario like mine.

Since i had to learn the hard way, that git subtree merge strategy is totally not capable of dealing with my repo/szenario, i'd like to evaluate my odds with git-subtree beforehand.

svick
  • 236,525
  • 50
  • 385
  • 514
jdlx
  • 125
  • 8

1 Answers1

1

Git-subtree is just a script wrapper for basic git functionality (that uses the subtree merge strategy btw.). Since git is stable in a "large repo/lots of subtrees/deeply nested/lots of flux" scenario, git-subtree will handle that fine, too.

If you want to know details and are wondering how git-subtree does stuff and whether it’s methods will scale for your repo, just have a look at it’s source.

In general it might be advisable to stick with submodules, though – most of its problems can be avoided by writing a few scripts.

Chronial
  • 66,706
  • 14
  • 93
  • 99
  • Im looking for *been there, done that* infos. And no, submodules don't fit my needs well.. some actually at all: .e.g. since Github dumped the custom DLs, there's no way to DL a ad hoc working copy of a repo, since the submodules are missing. Github uses plain `git -archive` .. no way to script around that. subtrees would do that trick. – jdlx Jan 29 '13 at 22:35