From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jon Seymour Subject: Re: [RFC] submodule: fix handling of supermodules with relative origin URLs. Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 07:45:42 +1000 Message-ID: References: <1337343220-26717-1-git-send-email-jon.seymour@gmail.com> <4FB6A9CB.5050702@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com To: Jens Lehmann X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri May 18 23:45:53 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SVUze-00076w-B6 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 18 May 2012 23:45:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S968052Ab2ERVpp (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 May 2012 17:45:45 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:59443 "EHLO mail-we0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S967680Ab2ERVpo (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 May 2012 17:45:44 -0400 Received: by weyu7 with SMTP id u7so2071481wey.19 for ; Fri, 18 May 2012 14:45:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=mXBkUKwi5NgyVh5dsZ22xqfZRHaefoNywkf78Um+Pgk=; b=TaDB59UbLqpmNZ5uabX/gREeH2hlFg/8KcFFGVMFTquyzfs3pjq9Cw2IzJxboISHny 81QDcOlgIC92nMLPIJwpwxYF/ndoTIo0YLVXGINhpmduddUzCsvXdzx3Q7WN2Mw1tuMO M8KG/9WC+K+KMy3CYIWTmOqVEBAVGRyPpeikpina9JcCHYnzv2glFRmXFt5qGcJLu7L8 iJpVbe52a7l29gbuZZBmMZZ7es7AC4k4aQ9m2aQQ5bSr2nvitWtNJtp/IZlIT86+72v/ t2nUeCZi97F2hphN+rJ5/+OpSd+DdxdRrKG0XthTtUt9iTnMp5+SC2DpseS1zIxpcO5V jgWQ== Received: by 10.180.86.197 with SMTP id r5mr5115314wiz.21.1337377542892; Fri, 18 May 2012 14:45:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.180.146.166 with HTTP; Fri, 18 May 2012 14:45:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4FB6A9CB.5050702@web.de> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, May 19, 2012 at 5:58 AM, Jens Lehmann wrote: > This version of the patch does break some existing tests, but your > follow up suggests you already found that out yourself ;-) > Actually, that was just by reading the patch and noticing odd-ness. I realise now that I snuck in that bogus edit after I had run the tests which were otherwise clean - d'oh. > > Me thinks up_path should be set in the case below, which is the only > place where it is used. Ok. > > Isn't sm_path already set correctly here? I think this line should > be dropped. > Yes, good point. Thanks. > > Same here. > Thanks. > > Other than that the patch looks fine. Thanks for the review - I'll add some tests for the new behaviour. jon.