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=-5.7 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 8255D203EC for ; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 19:11:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934060AbcLMTLL (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2016 14:11:11 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:51605 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932547AbcLMTLK (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2016 14:11:10 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F87A53DE2; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 14:11:07 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=wXRArdv6a/qBPPPGOc6xBu6ZFls=; b=pEMvnu SwjB1OVbutTVy0lkEACv99W9VXj+4MAgPMdAI5HUhsiXy4Wvzz+8yKUvOWHgOCV4 dA28Ela/tpcUsCmwxDJpNRC6pdsK4Cs8HiOkxXOP8P/nESjGm7XEHjb4u0sNV+D1 cQa7CK5u3SIiDOO53a6hCytw35r0IgDaBDclk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=jlF7bDDV2+oRAFrnHry06GQHOBAf05du 431Q7ZbUD0PrKUKjZgWSetw2Yrx7XXDt2UpVeI3uwCFJnmB3Jdnzlma5fyK8LYVH HDdbRg6h6gYQ+ffFrHzbj7dQhS7K5MZrcyNl3YLBDhd3CAhPF7CEwI6UN050PEgn 3IdhWNADD5M= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7501653DE1; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 14:11:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E07FB53DE0; Tue, 13 Dec 2016 14:11:06 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Stefan Beller Cc: "git\@vger.kernel.org" , David Turner , Brandon Williams Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] git-rm absorbs submodule git directory before deletion References: <20161213014055.14268-1-sbeller@google.com> Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 11:11:05 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Beller's message of "Tue, 13 Dec 2016 11:07:32 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E6349656-C167-11E6-B830-E98412518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Stefan Beller writes: >> I do not think there is no dispute about what embedding means. > > double negative: You think we have a slight dispute here. Sorry, I do not think there is any dispute on that. >> A >> submodule whose .git is inside its working tree has its repository >> embedded. >> >> What we had trouble settling on was what to call the operation to >> undo the embedding, unentangling its repository out of the working >> tree. I'd still vote for unembed if you want a name to be nominated. > > So I can redo the series with two commands "git submodule [un]embed". > > For me "unembed" == "absorb", such that we could also go with > absorb into superproject <-> embed into worktree With us agreeing that "embed" is about something is _IN_ submodule working tree, unembed would naturally be something becomes OUTSIDE the same thing (i.e. "submodule working tree"). However, if you introduce "absorb", we suddenly need to talk about a different thing, i.e. "superproject's .git/modules", that is doing the absorption. That is why I suggest "unembed" over "absorb".