From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jens Lehmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Teach fetch/pull the on-demand mode and make it the default Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:48:56 +0100 Message-ID: <4D659CE8.3030604@web.de> References: <4D656F25.5090007@web.de> <20110223232156.GE6819@elie> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Git Mailing List , Junio C Hamano , Marc Branchaud , Kevin Ballard , Heiko Voigt To: Jonathan Nieder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Feb 24 00:49:03 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PsOS7-0007fk-0a for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:49:03 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753582Ab1BWXs6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Feb 2011 18:48:58 -0500 Received: from fmmailgate02.web.de ([217.72.192.227]:42600 "EHLO fmmailgate02.web.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752712Ab1BWXs5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Feb 2011 18:48:57 -0500 Received: from smtp04.web.de ( [172.20.0.225]) by fmmailgate02.web.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7A67198E99FB; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:48:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from [93.240.119.189] (helo=[192.168.178.43]) by smtp04.web.de with asmtp (WEB.DE 4.110 #2) id 1PsOS0-0001kt-00; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:48:56 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; de; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 In-Reply-To: <20110223232156.GE6819@elie> X-Sender: Jens.Lehmann@web.de X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19dLY77TXpiS5i1+JvglHDSWDyesyQn6hBhMM6c ZS7rDCFCHk6QsTzadwlU+6knhWmHdn4esvQo+qQdWUv6wO7WY2 hoo56kOyRewlaCW+83xQ== Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 24.02.2011 00:21, schrieb Jonathan Nieder: > Jens Lehmann wrote: > >> *) The fetch is only done when the recorded submodule commit isn't >> already present. > > I like this part a lot. Glad to hear ;-) >> I tend to think that this is suited for 1.7.5 but don't have any >> objections against holding it back until 1.8.0 either. What do >> others think? > > I see no backward-compatibility to wait for this, but I would be more > included to trust people using "git submodule update" heavily than I > do. Yeah, I would appreciate some feedback here too. > The "submodule update" change could cause the following to break. > Would that be disruptive? > > cd submodule > git fetch --no-recurse-submodules > ... > > cd .. > bin/script-to-update-submodules-that-calls-submodule-update But then "git submodule update" would notice that the commit isn't present and do a "git fetch" itself, no?