From: Chris Shoemaker <c.shoemaker@cox.net>
To: Nigel Magnay <nigel.magnay@gmail.com>
Cc: git <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: submodules workflow aches
Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 14:11:34 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080519181134.GA7928@pe.Belkin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <320075ff0805190756x3adf1684i3980aac15e2ddb88@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 03:56:49PM +0100, Nigel Magnay wrote:
> We've been using submodule support for a few months (and I've been
> checking out the list to see what other people are doing); it works
> well, but there's a couple of ache points (in the sense that if I'm to
> convince SVN users to migrate, they're liable to point and laugh).
>
> The first nuisance is the 'get me up to date' stanza of 'git pull &&
> git submodule update' always leaving you on (no branch), even if you
> were on [master] before, and the head commit now is also equal to
> [master]. Having to remember to go into several submodules and do 'git
> checkout master' to get you back to ready-to-do-work mode isn't nice
> (and is worse if you're on autopilot, and someone has committed a
> submodule on a different branch
It might help if you describe more completely how you expect it to behave
under a wide variety of conditions. I suspect that the current behavior
is the simplest behavior that remains correct under all conditions.
> The second nuisance is around conflicts in submodules. If I make a
> (non-conflicting) change to a submodule, merge with the head and
> commit, then when I do a 'git pull' in the superproject readiness to
> do a push, I get a conflict. This is presumably because it doesn't
> know that the submodule change is a fast-forward. It'd be nice if it
> could figure that out, and not conflict?
If I follow the scenario correctly, you're essentially pulling into a
dirty working tree. I guess you're saying that if the submodule
wasn't touched by the merge, you'd like it to leave your working tree
dirty?
> Are people writing their own wrapper scripts for this? I find I have a
> hard time explaining why it's all necessary to svn users who just (by
> and large) do 'svn up' and 'svn ci' on projects..
I'll throw out one nuisance that I hit, perhaps related to your second
one: in the super-module, rebasing a series containing a submodule
update. I start the rebase with a clean working tree, but since the
rebase doesn't update the submodule, (which I wouldn't really want it
to do anyway) the rebase aborts in the middle with:
$ git rebase --continue
plugin/submodule: needs update
Working tree is dirty
forcing me to "git submodule update" in order to continue.
Then, when the rebase finishes, my working tree is dirty again because
the submodule is out-of-date, so I have to "submodule update" AGAIN.
Am I just missing the much better way to do this?
-chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-05-19 18:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-19 14:56 submodules workflow aches Nigel Magnay
2008-05-19 18:11 ` Chris Shoemaker [this message]
2008-05-19 18:55 ` Nigel Magnay
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
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080519181134.GA7928@pe.Belkin \
--to=c.shoemaker@cox.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nigel.magnay@gmail.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.
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 NNTP newsgroup(s).