From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiko Voigt Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] teach config parsing to read from strbuf Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:39:33 +0100 Message-ID: <20130314063933.GB4062@sandbox-ub.fritz.box> References: <20130310165642.GA1136@sandbox-ub.fritz.box> <20130310170052.GE1136@sandbox-ub.fritz.box> <20130312111806.GF11340@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20130312164254.GB4752@sandbox-ub.fritz.box> <20130312192959.GG17099@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Jens Lehmann , Ramsay Jones To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Mar 14 07:40:14 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UG1pf-00064Z-Gr for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:40:07 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754443Ab3CNGjl (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Mar 2013 02:39:41 -0400 Received: from smtprelay06.ispgateway.de ([80.67.31.104]:56949 "EHLO smtprelay06.ispgateway.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753950Ab3CNGjk (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Mar 2013 02:39:40 -0400 Received: from [77.21.76.82] (helo=localhost) by smtprelay06.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1UG1p8-00040m-6N; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:39:34 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130312192959.GG17099@sigill.intra.peff.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Df-Sender: aHZvaWd0QGh2b2lndC5uZXQ= Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 03:29:59PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:42:54PM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote: > > > > Your series does not actually add any callers of the new function. The > > > obvious "patch 5/4" would be to plumb it into "git config --blob", and > > > then we can just directly test it there (there could be other callers > > > besides reading from a blob, of course, but I think the point of the > > > series is to head in that direction). > > > > Since this is a split of the series mentioned above there are no real > > callers yet. The main reason for the split was that I wanted to reduce > > the review burden of one big series into multiple reviews of smaller > > chunks. If you think it is useful to add the --blob option I can also > > test from there. It could actually be useful to look at certain > > .gitmodules options from the submodule script. > > I am on the fence. I do not want to create more work for you, but I do > think it may come in handy, if only for doing submodule things from > shell. And it is hopefully not a very large patch. I'd say try it, and > if starts looking like it will be very ugly, the right thing may be to > leave it until somebody really wants it. Thats what I will do: Try it and see where I get. Cheers Heiko