From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] git-submodule: allow submodule name and path to differ Date: Sat, 09 Jun 2007 17:27:20 -0700 Message-ID: <7vbqfod57b.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <1181425132239-git-send-email-hjemli@gmail.com> <1181425132294-git-send-email-hjemli@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Sven Verdoolaege , git@vger.kernel.org To: Lars Hjemli X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jun 10 02:27:25 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HxBH9-0005ce-PH for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 10 Jun 2007 02:27:24 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759173AbXFJA1W (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Jun 2007 20:27:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759158AbXFJA1W (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Jun 2007 20:27:22 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao102.cox.net ([68.230.241.44]:59423 "EHLO fed1rmmtao102.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759133AbXFJA1V (ORCPT ); Sat, 9 Jun 2007 20:27:21 -0400 Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao102.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.05.02.00 201-2174-114-20060621) with ESMTP id <20070610002721.UQXJ12207.fed1rmmtao102.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net>; Sat, 9 Jun 2007 20:27:21 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id 9cTL1X0071kojtg0000000; Sat, 09 Jun 2007 20:27:21 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1181425132294-git-send-email-hjemli@gmail.com> (Lars Hjemli's message of "Sat, 9 Jun 2007 23:38:50 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Lars Hjemli writes: > This teaches git-submodule to check module.*.path when looking for the > config for a submodule path. If no match is found it falls back to the > current behaviour (module.$path). I have a feeling that it might be much less troublesome in the longer term to admit that module.$path was a mistake and support only one format; wouldn't trying to support both leave ambiguity and confusion?