From: Heiko Voigt <hvoigt@hvoigt.net>
To: Chris Packham <judge.packham@gmail.com>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, mara.kim@vanderbilt.edu,
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
Subject: Re: Re: [RFC PATCH] clone: add clone.recursesubmodules config option
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2014 07:54:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140606055430.GC77405@book.hvoigt.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <539020D1.1090601@gmail.com>
On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 07:48:33PM +1200, Chris Packham wrote:
> On 05/06/14 07:42, Heiko Voigt wrote:
> > I like this idea of specifying different "views" by giving tags. But
> > does it rule out a boolean clone.recursesubmodules? For the simple case
> > some people might not want to worry about specifying tags but just want
> > to configure: "Yes give me everything". So if we were to do this I would
> > like it if we could have both. Also because the option for clone is
> > --recurse-submodules and our typical schema is that a configuration
> > option is named similar so clone.recursesubmodules would fit here.
>
> Maybe using a glob pattern would work.
>
> The user might say
>
> [clone]
> recursesubmodules = x86*
>
> And .gitmodules might say
>
> [submodule "foo"]
> tags = x86_64
> [submodule "bar"]
> tags = x86
> [submodule "frotz"]
> tags = powerpc
>
> For the "Yes give me everything" case the user could say
>
> [clone]
> recursesubmodules = *
Thats interesting. Lets me/us think about that a little more.
> > So either we do this "magically" and all valid boolean values are
> > forbidden as tags or we would need a different config option. Further
> > thinking about it: Maybe a general option that does not only apply to
> > clone would suit the "views" use-case more. E.g. "submodule.tags" or
> > similar.
> >
> > Also please note: We have been talking about adding two configurations
> > for submodules:
> >
> > submodule."name".autoclone (IIRC)
> >
> > I am not sure whether that was the correct name, but this option should
> > tell recursive fetch / clone whether to automatically clone a submodule
> > when it appears on a fetch in the history.
> >
> > submodule."name".autoinit
> >
> > And this one is for recursive checkout and tells whether an appearing
> > submodule should automatically be initialized.
> >
> > These options fullfill a similar use-case and are planned for the future
> > when recursive fetch/clone and checkout are in place (which is not that
> > far away). We might need to rethink these to incoporate the "views from
> > tags" idea nicely and since we do not want a configuration nightmare.
>
> I'm a little confused at how autoclone and autoinit differ. Aren't they
> the same? i.e. when this module appears grab it by default. I see
> autoupdate as a little different meaning update it if it's been
> initialised. Also does autoinit imply autoupdate?
autoclone is about cloning the history of submodules. So e.g. when a
submodule first appears in the superprojects history whether it should
automatically be cloned to .git/modules.
autoinit is all about the checkout phase. When a commit with a new
submodule is checked out: Should that new submodule be automatically
initialised?
As far as autoupdate is concerned: Maybe autoinit can imply that it is
enabled, yes. But I guess we still need autoupdate for the case of big
submodules that cause to much performance trouble if updated by every
checkout.
So its actually three values: autoclone, autoinit, autoupdate. Damn,
these configurations become more complicated everytime. Maybe we should
try to clean them, up once we have everything, with Git 3.0 ;-) If
anyone has an idea how to get rid of some right now...
Radically different thinking: How about just one: submodule.auto =
true/false configuration and that means you opt in to doing everything
as automatic as possible. Since we are still implementing we could stick
a prominent warning in the documentation that the user should be
prepared for behavioral changes.
Once everybody is happy with that we could switch the default from false
to true.
> At $dayjob we have a superproject which devs clone this has submodules
> for the important and/or high touch repositories. We have other
> repositories that are normally build from a tarball (or not built at
> all) but we can build them from external repositories if needed. The
> latter case is painfully manual. If autoinit/autoupdate existed we'd
> probably setup out projects with.
>
> [submodule "linux"]
> autoinit = true
> autoupdate = true
> [submodule "userland"]
> autoinit = true
> autoupdate = true
> [submodule "not-used-that-much"]
> autoupdate = true
>
> We probably wouldn't make use of tags because we're building complete
> embedded systems and generally want everything, even if we are doing
> most of our work on a particular target we need to do builds for other
> targets for sanity checks.
Yep thats exactly what we already do at $dayjob but with
submodule.*.update=none. Since that conveniently also disables the
initialisation, developers only get the basic code and not everyone
needs to have the media and some big external libs.
I would reuse 'update' in the long run. But I guess for the transition
we will need the extra autoupdate one to keep annoyance levels low.
We currently also do not have real use cases for the tags/views
scenario, but as repositories grow I can see that it could be useful so
I would like it if we could keep the configuration open to that.
Cheers Heiko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-06 5:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-03 18:11 Paper cut bug: Why isn't "git clone xxxx" recursive by default? Mara Kim
2014-06-03 19:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-06-03 21:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-06-03 22:24 ` Mara Kim
2014-06-04 9:30 ` [RFC PATCH] clone: add clone.recursesubmodules config option Chris Packham
2014-06-04 17:24 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-06-04 19:06 ` Jens Lehmann
2014-06-05 18:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-06-05 18:43 ` W. Trevor King
2014-06-06 5:26 ` Heiko Voigt
2017-08-02 18:11 ` Jeremy Morton
2017-08-02 20:34 ` Stefan Beller
2014-06-04 19:42 ` Heiko Voigt
2014-06-05 7:48 ` Chris Packham
2014-06-06 5:54 ` Heiko Voigt [this message]
2014-06-06 16:35 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-06-09 13:17 ` Jens Lehmann
2014-06-09 23:27 ` W. Trevor King
2016-10-03 15:36 ` Jeremy Morton
2016-10-03 17:18 ` Stefan Beller
2016-10-04 11:41 ` Heiko Voigt
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20140606055430.GC77405@book.hvoigt.net \
--to=hvoigt@hvoigt.net \
--cc=Jens.Lehmann@web.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=judge.packham@gmail.com \
--cc=mara.kim@vanderbilt.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).