From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B27711F859 for ; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 21:11:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755382AbcHSVLl (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2016 17:11:41 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:61844 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752435AbcHSVLl (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Aug 2016 17:11:41 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEFC835EF8; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 17:11:39 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=/edzr6wBKTh3AESUNuXEkLcivZc=; b=a2KMhd C1+c/p95vW2F/OywoVC/qPTRLDVHdlg1ZjAiK7FH0Cl6/DY1QZoVz1PM3ajIcRmr 0QkIbJLZuYUZDlDZ7A4W5dLH+f4AUfRTraGYITZe4QzoAs0eQgtriTO6o5C2hwu1 C69ZUTkGagHmUV1uiqLryr1WO78LJ+PWjOpMc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=hy5QvDR1EUculg7W5mJYjeFzSLohyc3G rz0y6VWz6zfsBXjMRvEy9oSQKu0yBAEC9xBFMGCK49tZXllB+d26K5CVxMwHbeU9 tTZNbVwPWZQKvN5XltDkOIq/lcdIQtazzDKWiXCkp7RU+A2Jzv5+I+gQJjxestCd Jm1CJM4yj0o= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4DF935EF7; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 17:11:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3B93735EF6; Fri, 19 Aug 2016 17:11:39 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jacob Keller Cc: Jacob Keller , Git mailing list , Stefan Beller , Jeff King , Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 4/8] submodule: allow add_submodule_odb to work even if path is not checked out References: <20160819000031.24854-1-jacob.e.keller@intel.com> <20160819000031.24854-5-jacob.e.keller@intel.com> Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 14:11:37 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Jacob Keller's message of "Fri, 19 Aug 2016 13:32:27 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 851F90B2-6651-11E6-A01F-FCB17B1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jacob Keller writes: > submodule. I think we already have the complete path. Or is the name > *not* equivalent to the path? A submodule that is bound to top-level at "path" originally gets "path" as its name. If you move it elsewhere, you do not want it to lose its identity (and its place in .git/modules/* of the top-level). so a submodule whose name is "path" can reside in the new place after such a move. > There was no empty line in the place I copied from. Is that "because I copied from a source that is mistaken, I refuse to make it right"? Or just an explanation why there is a mistake? Or something else (like "we should update the original one while we are at it as a pure clean-up")? > If we put them in test_expect_success setup they aren't. Yes, that is why I said they are unnecessary. Let's minimize the amount of random code that sits outside the control of the test framework (i.e. test_expect_{success,failure}). Thanks.