What's new in Git 2.1
blogs.atlassian.com
blogs.atlassian.com
Manually running "git submodule update" after every single command is terrible.
Having the submodule in a modified state with "new commits", with no differentiation about whether what changed is the HEAD of the submodule or the parent ptr is also horrible. Did you forget to commit the submodule change? Or did you forget to "git submodule update"? Who knows??
Git clone of a repo that has submodules shows a clean status! It should say: "missing submodules" or ideally, do a "git submodule update --init" by default, but instead you're left wondering why build doesn't work.
The command line is a little obscure (at least, I can never remember the command to pull the latest remote changes first time) but overall the use of them is a lot nicer, for the way I work at least. Being able to have "local" edits to subtrees while still allowing remote updating and colleagues to clone the repo with the local updates is rather useful.
Does it does it do what I think it does -- let you rewrite history and keep the rest of commit ids the same?
I thought that would be impossible up to this point (as in you could re-write all your commits, filter some, presumably with some secret passwords or something, but then you'd end up with different commit ids).
I read the linked blog post and I still don't see a good use case for git replace. I can think up a lot of potential downsides and sources of mass confusion of course!
So, I second that. Anyone know a good, real-world, use for git replace? The example given in the blog post seems overcomplex. It would be easier and more idiomatic to just use rebase. (Yes, rebasing would change the commit SHAs, but would anybody care?)
However, sometimes it may be necessary for developers to do a `git blame` which needs to include the old data or similar. If this happens, you add the historical repo as another remote and `git replace` the oldest commit from the dev repo with the historical repo.
Only a few developers will ever need to use `git replace` in this scenario, so it would not say that it is too confusing. (If it was confusing, I’d say everybody would probably have learned that it exists the hard way…) Maybe think of it as a kind of git submodule but for time.
It also takes exactly one search for the username to find out the poster here is the author of the article, and since when has posting one's own articles (whether or not they're posted on your employer's blog) been forbidden?
Is this, indeed, seen as bad behavior here?
http://www.reddit.com/wiki/selfpromotion
(The self-promotion rules have also been relaxed recently on a case-by-case basis within specific subreddits.)
See also "What is spam?" on http://www.reddit.com/rules which says "OK: Submitting links from your own site, talking with redditors in the comments, and also submitting cool stuff from other sites."