Re: Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2013, #09; Wed, 29)

[John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>]

On Tue, Jun 04, 2013 at 03:29:51PM +1000, Heiko Voigt wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 11:23:41PM +0100, John Keeping wrote:
> > > Sorry, I should have been more specific here. I saw that you did some
> > > changes to make "submodule add" do the right thing with relative paths,
> > > but the following change to t7406 does not work like I believe it
> > > should but instead makes the test fail:
> > > -------------------8<---------------------
> > > diff --git a/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh b/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh
> > > index a4ffea0..9766b9e 100755
> > > --- a/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh
> > > +++ b/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh
> > > @@ -559,7 +559,9 @@ test_expect_success 'add different submodules to the same pa
> > >  test_expect_success 'submodule add places git-dir in superprojects git-dir' '
> > >         (cd super &&
> > >          mkdir deeper &&
> > > -        git submodule add ../submodule deeper/submodule &&
> > > +        (cd deeper &&
> > > +         git submodule add ../../submodule submodule
> > > +        ) &&
> > >          (cd deeper/submodule &&
> > >           git log > ../../expected
> > >          ) &&
> > > -------------------8<---------------------
> > 
> > Ah, ok.  I think this case is problematic because the repository
> > argument is either relative to "remote.origin.url" or to the top of the
> > working tree if there is no "origin" remote.  I wonder if we should just
> > die when a relative path is given for the repository and we're not at
> > the top of the working tree.
> 
> Why not behave as if we are at the top of the working tree for relative
> paths? If there is an origin remote thats fine. If there is no origin
> remote you could warn that the path used is taken relative from the root
> of the superproject during add. What do you think?

That's what the patch currently queued on "pu" does, which Jens wants to
change, isn't it?