From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Lehmann Subject: Re: RFC: Making submodules "track" branches Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2010 09:09:48 +0200 Message-ID: <4C0F3E3C.3090007@web.de> References: <201006080912.31448.johan@herland.net> <4C0E6A8A.70608@web.de> <7vbpblruj8.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Junio C Hamano , Johan Herland , git@vger.kernel.org To: =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 09 09:09:56 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 1OMFQB-0000vm-FH for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 09:09:55 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753807Ab0FIHJu convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jun 2010 03:09:50 -0400 Received: from fmmailgate03.web.de ([217.72.192.234]:46944 "EHLO fmmailgate03.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751630Ab0FIHJu (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Jun 2010 03:09:50 -0400 Received: from smtp06.web.de ( [172.20.5.172]) by fmmailgate03.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7821154EEA92; Wed, 9 Jun 2010 09:09:48 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [80.128.93.210] (helo=[192.168.178.26]) by smtp06.web.de with asmtp (WEB.DE 4.110 #4) id 1OMFQ4-0006c7-00; Wed, 09 Jun 2010 09:09:48 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; de; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 In-Reply-To: X-Sender: Jens.Lehmann@web.de X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18OExxkbZ1TwUvoAREY7NBEqM1uy7uMbqPHh80K QhC4xMFnkKEFKXpcPal+tq3ndojcNxiaI+Ip5IFtTMTGSemq/j bZFWSs1L3MtVSSL6hPNw== Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 09.06.2010 01:19, schrieb =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason: > On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 23:09, Junio C Hamano wrot= e: >> Wouldn't it be enough to say --ignore-submodules for your day-to-day= work, >> without lying in the gitlink entry in the superproject tree? An ent= ry >> "submodule.foo.branch =3D fred" in your .gitmodules will still tell = your >> local git to update the submodule worktree to work on 'fred' branch.= At >> least, an arrangement like that would allow the build infrastructure= to >> use --no-ignore-submodules when running its equivalent of GIT-VERSIO= N-GEN >> to notice that what you are building is using something different fr= om >> what the superproject specified to use in the submodule, while not b= ugging >> you with differences you do not care about (or you already know abou= t and >> are irrelevant to the change you are working on). >=20 > Yes I think that's even better, to have no entry in the superproject'= s > tree at all, and just a repo/branch pair in .gitmodules. Thats not how I understood Junio proposal, but an alternative to using 0{40} could be to just drop the submodule entry from the tree. You get = the same result, but maybe less problems with older versions of git. > Less confusion and the same features. Not knowing the version of a submodule looks to me like a very powerful source of confusion, but maybe thats just me ;-)