From: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Heiko Voigt <hvoigt@hvoigt.net>,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
"git@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>,
Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/4] change submodule push test to use proper repository setup
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 16:41:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAGZ79kaqAi2-2KfQqqW1TvBvmHb_13gjZSycY2GsVgakLWcxFw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqq7ew2pokm.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
>
>> So you propose to make git-add behave like "git submodule add"
>> (i.e. also add the .gitmodules entry for name/path/URL), which I
>> like from a submodule perspective.
>>
>> However other users of gitlinks might be confused[1], which is why
>> I refrained from "making every gitlink into a submodule". Specifically
>> the more powerful a submodule operation is (the more fluff adds),
>> the harder it should be for people to mis-use it.
>
> A few questions that come to mind are:
>
> - Does "git add sub/" have enough information to populate
> .gitmodules? If we have reasonable "default" values for
> .gitmodules entries (e.g. missing URL means we won't fetch when
> asked to go recursively fetch), perhaps we can leave everything
> other than "submodule.$name.path" undefined.
I think we would want to populate path and URL only.
>
> - Can't we help those who have gitlinks without .gitmodules entries
> exactly the same way as above, i.e. when we see a gitlink and try
> to treat it as a submodule, we'd first try to look it up from
> .gitmodules (by going from path to name and then to
> submodule.$name.$var); the above "'git add sub/' would add an
> entry for .gitmodules" wish is based on the assumption that there
> are reasonable "default" values for each of these $var--so by
> basing on the same assumption, we can "pretend" as if these
> submodule.$name.$var were in .gitmodules file when we see
> gitlinks without .gitmodules entries. IOW, if "git add sub/" can
> add .gitmodules to help people without having to type "git
> submodule add sub/", then we can give exactly the same degree of
> help without even modifying .gitmodules when "git add sub/" is
> run.
I do not understand the gist of this paragraph, other then:
"When git-add <repository> encounters a section submodule.<name>.*,
do not modify it; We can assume it is sane already."
> - Even if we could solve it with "git add sub/" that adds to
> .gitmodules, is it a good solution, when we can solve the same
> thing without having to do so?
I am confused even more.
So you suggest that "git add [--gitlink=submodule]" taking on the
responsibilities of "git submodule add" is a bad idea?
I thought we had the same transition from "git remote update" to
"git fetch", which eventually superseded the former.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-10-10 23:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-06 22:25 [RFC PATCH v3 0/4] implement fetching of moved submodules Heiko Voigt
2017-10-06 22:30 ` [RFC PATCH 1/4] fetch: add test to make sure we stay backwards compatible Heiko Voigt
2017-10-06 22:32 ` [RFC PATCH 2/4] change submodule push test to use proper repository setup Heiko Voigt
2017-10-09 18:20 ` Stefan Beller
2017-10-10 13:03 ` Heiko Voigt
2017-10-10 18:39 ` Stefan Beller
2017-10-10 23:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-10 23:41 ` Stefan Beller [this message]
2017-10-11 0:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-11 14:56 ` Heiko Voigt
2017-10-12 0:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-11 14:52 ` Heiko Voigt
2017-10-11 15:10 ` Josh Triplett
2017-10-12 16:17 ` Brandon Williams
2017-10-06 22:34 ` [RFC PATCH v3 3/4] implement fetching of moved submodules Heiko Voigt
2017-10-06 22:35 ` [RFC PATCH v3 4/4] submodule: simplify decision tree whether to or not to fetch Heiko Voigt
2017-10-06 22:57 ` [RFC PATCH v3 0/4] implement fetching of moved submodules Stefan Beller
2017-10-07 1:24 ` Junio C Hamano
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=CAGZ79kaqAi2-2KfQqqW1TvBvmHb_13gjZSycY2GsVgakLWcxFw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=sbeller@google.com \
--cc=Jens.Lehmann@web.de \
--cc=bmwill@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=hvoigt@hvoigt.net \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
/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).