From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Cc: git <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: sb/submodule-recursive-checkout-detach-head
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2017 11:00:57 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq4lq6hmp2.fsf_-_@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79kYUZv0g+3OEMrbT26A7mSLJzeS-yf5Knr-CnARHqVB=aQ@mail.gmail.com> (Stefan Beller's message of "Fri, 27 Oct 2017 11:50:49 -0700")
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
>> * sb/submodule-recursive-checkout-detach-head (2017-07-28) 2 commits
>> (merged to 'next' on 2017-10-26 at 30994b4c76)
>> + Documentation/checkout: clarify submodule HEADs to be detached
>> + recursive submodules: detach HEAD from new state
>>
>> "git checkout --recursive" may overwrite and rewind the history of
>> the branch that happens to be checked out in submodule
>> repositories, which might not be desirable. Detach the HEAD but
>> still allow the recursive checkout to succeed in such a case.
>>
>> Undecided.
>> This needs justification in a larger picture; it is unclear why
>> this is better than rejecting recursive checkout, for example.
> ...
> Detaching the submodule HEAD is in line with the current thinking
> of submodules, though I am about to send out a plan later
> asking if we want to keep it that way long term.
Did this "send out a plan" ever happen? I am about to rewind 'next'
and rebuild on top of v2.15, and wondering if I should keep the
topic or kick it back to 'pu' so that a better justification can be
given.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-11-07 2:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-10-27 8:32 What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2017, #06; Fri, 27) Junio C Hamano
2017-10-27 18:50 ` Stefan Beller
2017-11-07 2:00 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2017-11-07 17:05 ` sb/submodule-recursive-checkout-detach-head Stefan Beller
2017-11-08 0:21 ` sb/submodule-recursive-checkout-detach-head Junio C Hamano
2017-10-28 17:13 ` What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2017, #06; Fri, 27) Kaartic Sivaraam
2017-10-29 13:13 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-10-29 14:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-10-29 15:18 ` Johannes Schindelin
2017-10-30 1:27 ` 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=xmqq4lq6hmp2.fsf_-_@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sbeller@google.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).