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=-4.4 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 3AD61207DF for ; Fri, 9 Sep 2016 23:57:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751203AbcIIX5F (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Sep 2016 19:57:05 -0400 Received: from mail-oi0-f42.google.com ([209.85.218.42]:33406 "EHLO mail-oi0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750976AbcIIX5E (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Sep 2016 19:57:04 -0400 Received: by mail-oi0-f42.google.com with SMTP id y2so174830911oie.0 for ; Fri, 09 Sep 2016 16:57:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=kNkTEkO10W14jKYerT5V4hBLxa6C7tPgfYTxfNDsxRo=; b=HDv2sErL9ma0Q4/kxgi2Kf+6UOcibg5u7/2bEw7ZWD1GG1VptgXfJ7T2cvm5hhggB3 4BVHndSx0WjGYHvF0stG0m+0cT0QYzrHonaXZ4ku+gT89XylvT8qobRK6UPAVY5tgcdy L/1B/TexfTNDNFFTxSaBf022xy5weh+qzXCMdhTnjNxztC3Axk7X7ZA8ZaM4x6Y+TlsJ l8aqC0BY9jJ/N50Q1uoQhIrhGzPA4/U9KyovrcUqWSWHI6e4BVZmEPtfIzWWZlT23zvw pZvLNFq5mBvQhhiqZO7lBBvJTED5YTpOH86qJsFzggTP2vB4RXRskbYdhbe4JUsw5qXf L3wg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=kNkTEkO10W14jKYerT5V4hBLxa6C7tPgfYTxfNDsxRo=; b=GpqOBO1ksGg+AdSODd8vhKbAZKHgyLGiYRyWpDVrBp7woPD7MtaSUJpzIT64Fuo/zG MkO2dVyMf3ykdRH5tRF/ESdFrmmeFFoMETb8kvm1CCN3EQPdyBmrYwtyOLRlKt3fXb/d gtrXHVfuhZM0+LWg/otcX2MSebRHKGwuLYf2mPIoVNuEtzXJrM+XMoTMSjNXlhz84y+9 yvjWQSJps3OkXRgcT4HTubSx/vOu7N1rKDk2NUmTijOck4ud8ViBDP+WQbIXOlvNXQWm KAOSaDnJDdCD7zngpcf/exKmUw/Cx27Uoqk2LRq3l8MRI2Z1rtp8DBHyy9QRO0NRAmAC oGww== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwOmJYPjleXBFBETy8lT135oIuUl6Twd/HqAvMdwPUFr0H28v5dnNcd5kXwyELZUDuvz/gR0GMTar9PYejYm X-Received: by 10.202.75.143 with SMTP id y137mr5821210oia.167.1473465423335; Fri, 09 Sep 2016 16:57:03 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.128.66 with HTTP; Fri, 9 Sep 2016 16:57:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Stefan Beller Date: Fri, 9 Sep 2016 16:57:02 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: If a branch moves a submodule, "merge --ff[-only]" succeeds while "merge --no-ff" fails with conflicts To: Dakota Hawkins Cc: Git Mailing List , mwitte@ara.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Dakota Hawkins wrote: > Any ideas on this anywhere? > > In my opinion if a merge can fast-forward without conflict it should > trivially be able to non-fast-forward without conflict. Yes, I agree. Though the submodules still have a lot of sharp edges that you can injure yourself with. I am sorry to let you down here, but I did not have time and mental capacity to actually dive into the issue further this week. I hoped someone else would have picked up this thread and have a good idea. As you know currently the checkout doesn't touch submodules, i.e. you have to run "git submodule update" whenever the submodule changes. So when you checkout a different part of history, that moved a submodule, this will fail as the submodule still resides at the old place (and may have path name conflict with another thing) and is not there at the new place. I plan to fix that in the near future (read: teach git checkout to know about submodules), mind that there is already a patch series for exactly that out there in one of the branches of https://github.com/jlehmann/git-submod-enhancements This seems to be not an easy fix; Someone tried already and getting it polished enough to include it upstream was not successful. > > Also, I'm not too familiar/comfortable with mailing list etiquette, > and I don't want to be a bother by continuing to ping this thread. Pinging is fine, as it is rather easy to ignore mails on a mailing list. ;) I just don't know if it increases likelihood of someone responding. Thanks, Stefan