git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>, Johan Herland <johan@herland.net>
Cc: Git mailing list <git@vger.kernel.org>,
	"W. Trevor King" <wking@tremily.us>
Subject: Re: Possible regression in master? (submodules without a "master" branch)
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 18:31:27 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5334606F.5010109@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqob0ref3v.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

Am 27.03.2014 18:16, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Johan Herland <johan@herland.net> writes:
> 
>> I just found a failure to checkout a project with submodules where
>> there is no explicit submodule branch configuration, and the
>> submodules happen to not have a "master" branch:
>>
>>   git clone git://gitorious.org/qt/qt5.git qt5
>>   cd qt5
>>   git submodule init qtbase
>>   git submodule update
>>
>> In current master, the last command fails with the following output:
> 
> ... and with a bug-free system, what does it do instead?  Just clone
> 'qtbase' and make a detached-head checkout at the commit recorded in
> the superproject's tree, or something else?

After reverting 23d25e48f5ead73 on current master it clones 'qtbase'
nicely with a detached HEAD.

>>   Cloning into 'qtbase'...
>>   remote: Counting objects: 267400, done.
>>   remote: Compressing objects: 100% (61070/61070), done.
>>   remote: Total 267400 (delta 210431), reused 258876 (delta 202642)
>>   Receiving objects: 100% (267400/267400), 136.23 MiB | 6.73 MiB/s, done.
>>   Resolving deltas: 100% (210431/210431), done.
>>   Checking connectivity... done.
>>   error: pathspec 'origin/master' did not match any file(s) known to git.
>>   Unable to setup cloned submodule 'qtbase'
>>
>> Bisection points to 23d25e48f5ead73c9ce233986f90791abec9f1e8 (W.
>> Trevor King: submodule: explicit local branch creation in
>> module_clone). Looking at the patch, it seems to introduce an implicit
>> assumption on the submodule origin having a "master" branch. Is this
>> an intended change in behaviour?
> 
> If an existing set-up that was working in a sensible way is broken
> by a change that assumes something that should not be assumed, then
> that is a serious regression, I would have to say.

Yes, especially as it promised to not change this use case.

  reply	other threads:[~2014-03-27 17:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-03-27 14:21 Possible regression in master? (submodules without a "master" branch) Johan Herland
2014-03-27 15:52 ` W. Trevor King
2014-03-27 15:57   ` W. Trevor King
2014-03-27 17:23   ` Jens Lehmann
2014-03-27 18:30     ` Junio C Hamano
2014-03-27 22:55       ` Jens Lehmann
2014-03-27 23:27         ` Johan Herland
2014-03-28  2:33         ` W. Trevor King
2014-03-27 17:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-03-27 17:31   ` Jens Lehmann [this message]
2014-03-27 18:54     ` W. Trevor King
2014-03-27 19:39       ` Junio C Hamano
2014-03-27 20:27         ` Heiko Voigt
2014-03-27 23:06           ` Jens Lehmann
2014-03-27 23:21           ` Johan Herland
2014-03-28  3:05             ` W. Trevor King
2014-03-28  3:36               ` [RFC] submodule: change submodule.<name>.branch default from master to HEAD W. Trevor King
2014-03-28  3:43                 ` Eric Sunshine
2014-03-28  3:52                   ` W. Trevor King
2014-03-28  3:58                     ` W. Trevor King
2014-03-28 16:57                       ` Jens Lehmann
2014-03-28 17:10                         ` W. Trevor King
2014-03-31 19:31                           ` Jens Lehmann
2014-03-28 17:28                         ` Junio C Hamano
2014-03-31 19:35                 ` Jens Lehmann
2014-03-31 20:38                   ` W. Trevor King
2014-03-31 20:45                   ` Junio C Hamano
2014-03-27 21:01         ` submodule.<path>.branch vs. submodule.<name>.branch (was: Possible regression in master? (submodules without a "master" branch) W. Trevor King
2014-03-27 21:37           ` submodule.<path>.branch vs. submodule.<name>.branch Junio C Hamano

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=5334606F.5010109@web.de \
    --to=jens.lehmann@web.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=johan@herland.net \
    --cc=wking@tremily.us \
    /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).