From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marc Branchaud Subject: Re: RFC: Making submodules "track" branches Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2010 15:32:23 -0400 Message-ID: <4C0E9AC7.7080802@xiplink.com> References: <201006080912.31448.johan@herland.net> <4C0E630A.7020803@xiplink.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Johan Herland , git@vger.kernel.org To: =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jun 08 21:32:38 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OM4XO-0002Yc-Fe for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Jun 2010 21:32:38 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755545Ab0FHTcc convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:32:32 -0400 Received: from smtp192.iad.emailsrvr.com ([207.97.245.192]:59722 "EHLO smtp192.iad.emailsrvr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755361Ab0FHTcc (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:32:32 -0400 Received: from relay9.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay9.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 051F51DEACC; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:32:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: by relay9.relay.iad.mlsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: mbranchaud-AT-xiplink.com) with ESMTPSA id C63B21E6164; Tue, 8 Jun 2010 15:32:30 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100423 Thunderbird/3.0.4 In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 10-06-08 12:09 PM, =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason wrote: > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 15:34, Marc Branchaud w= rote: >> >> So, back to the issue at hand: Sometimes I want static (non-tracking= ) >> submodules, and sometimes I want dynamic (tracking) submodules. IMO= , this >> makes =C3=86var's proposed configuration-based approach impractical.= (Of course, >> I'm not looking to replicate svn's externals...) >=20 > I'm proposing that you be able to configure how you want to handle > submodules on a per-submodule basis. Yes, and that's precisely the problem. For a given submodule, sometime= s it should track a branch and sometimes it shouldn't. Having to edit a configuration to change that is impractical. > The exact semantics that I proposed may be impractical for some > reason, but the idea is that it'd be opt in. We'd perhaps have > multiple approaches (via config) to submodules, instead of the curren= t > monolithic scheme. Opting in or out can't just be a monolithic setting for each submodule.= A submodule's branch tracking has to be on or off depending on the circum= stances. > So if you didn't want a svn:externals like "always track trunk" > repository you'd just not set your superproject up to treat the > submodule like that. Yes, of course. I guess what I'm saying is that duplicating svn's externals doesn't see= m all that useful to me and I'd rather see git do better. I've no objection = if folks want to have such a feature, but to me it's not what "submodules tracking branches" should be about. >> - It *may* be good enough to assume that matching branch names in t= he >> super-repo and the submodules are in fact submodule-spanning branche= s. >=20 > That won't work for submodules that you don't control. I have a > repository that includes a lot of foreign code, they have a lot of > different names for their "main branch" between them. So it needs to > be configurable in the superproject. Good point. I agree. M.