Re: Submodule regression in 2.14?

[Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>]

On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 2:21 PM, Lars Schneider
<larsxschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Oh, wait.
>> $ git log --oneline v2.13.0..v2.14.1 -- builtin/pull.c
>> c9c63ee558 Merge branch 'sb/pull-rebase-submodule'
>> a6d7eb2c7a pull: optionally rebase submodules (remote submodule changes only)
>> could also be a culprit. Do you have pull.rebase set?
>
> I bisected the problem today and "a6d7eb2c7a pull: optionally rebase submodules
> (remote submodule changes only)" is indeed the culprit.
>
> The commit seems to break the following test case.
>
> diff --git a/t/t7400-submodule-basic.sh b/t/t7400-submodule-basic.sh
> index dcac364c5f..24f9729015 100755
> --- a/t/t7400-submodule-basic.sh
> +++ b/t/t7400-submodule-basic.sh
> @@ -1289,4 +1289,19 @@ test_expect_success 'init properly sets the config' '
>         test_must_fail git -C multisuper_clone config --get submodule.sub1.active
>  '
>
> +test_expect_success 'submodule update and git pull with disabled submodule' '
> +       test_when_finished "rm -rf multisuper_clone" &&
> +       pwd=$(pwd) &&
> +       git clone file://"$pwd"/multisuper multisuper_clone &&
> +       (
> +               cd multisuper_clone &&
> +               git config --local submodule.sub0.update none &&
> +               git submodule update --init --recursive &&
> +               git pull --recurse-submodules &&
> +               git submodule status | cut -c 1,43- >actual
> +       ) &&
> +       ls &&
> +       test_cmp expect multisuper_clone/actual
> +'

Thanks for providing this test.

cd trash directory.t7400-submodule-basic/multisuper_clone
cat .git/config
[submodule "sub0"]
  update = none
  active = true
  url = file:///.../t/trash directory.t7400-submodule-basic/sub1


submodule.<name>.update
    The default update procedure for a submodule.
    This variable is populated by git submodule init
    from the gitmodules(5) file. See description of
    update command in git-submodule(1).

The first sentence of .update is misleading IMHO as the
these settings should strictly apply to the "submodule update"
command. So "pull --recurse-submodules" ought to ignore it,
instead the pull can do whatever it wants, namely treat the
submodule roughly like a tree and either merge/rebase
inside the submodule as well. The user *asked* for recursive
pull after all.

Are you saying this might be a design mistake and
the .update ought to be respected by all the other
commands? For example
    git reset --recurse-submodules
should ignore the .update= none?

When designing these new recursive submodule functionality
outside the "submodule" command, I'd want submodules
to behave as much as possible like trees.

ideas?

Thanks,
Stefan

> +
>  test_done
>
>
> I am not familiar with the code. Does anyone see the problem
> right away?
>
> Thanks,
> Lars
>
>