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 D898C1FF7F for ; Wed, 7 Dec 2016 20:29:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932684AbcLGU3C (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:29:02 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:51137 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752658AbcLGU3C (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:29:02 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAFA855AF8; Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:29:00 -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=yemapRYMG0EWFMU/PzphKrFdUxo=; b=yPshfK D/JqLm8rN+lTxE6+oQVy3OIlpPiIE6HOxlRQ8tn/CrWb3Ic6RXef0x7GQEzA828r ciGh3nIvy1NaoIGY5VktezCtbDU8heEBt6S1ToMuHPVWZphvqOVuQOh0CcxCcKd4 nSR3blO6oY9VOgjLuJHomoezWHLsrNDblKHhY= 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=h9zuKwLlalCInReCDZGYlcHYDYs+He5M wJU7g9kIvy6sJyU0k9ei9N0uKvCI0a8CqTy/xrnO4yLokzvPj/VjJIykU3jphdsY Wbo1dvJ+n7eWOsikUdNg0k/DCoilwaLBl0idN+K7GHq9qc1bF+gHjQthCeMnRT14 gkJZ8d5UaA8= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8CCE55AF7; Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:29:00 -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-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0B5BC55AF6; Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:28:59 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Stefan Beller Cc: vi0oss@gmail.com, "git\@vger.kernel.org" , Stefan Beller Subject: Re: [PATCH] submodule--helper: set alternateLocation for cloned submodules References: <20161207184248.6130-1-vi0oss@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2016 12:28:58 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Beller's message of "Wed, 7 Dec 2016 12:26:36 -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: C9210B2C-BCBB-11E6-92A3-B2917B1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Stefan Beller writes: > On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Stefan Beller writes: >> >>>> This patch makes all not just the root repository, but also >>>> all submodules (recursively) have submodule.alternateLocation >>>> and submodule.alternateErrorStrategy configured, making Git >>>> search for possible alternates for nested submodules as well. >>> >>> Sounds great! >> >> Is it safe to assume that all the submodules used recursively by >> submodules share the same structure upstream? Does the alternate >> location mechanism degrades sensibly if this assumption turns out to >> be false (i.e. "possible alternates" above turns out to be mere >> possibility and not there)? > > According to the last test in the patch, this seems to be doing the > sensible thing. OK, that sounds great. Thanks.