From: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
To: "W. Trevor King" <wking@tremily.us>
Cc: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>,
Git <git@vger.kernel.org>, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Heiko Voigt <hvoigt@hvoigt.net>,
Johan Herland <johan@herland.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] submodule: change submodule.<name>.branch default from master to HEAD
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 21:31:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5339C29B.5030301@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140328171059.GJ25485@odin.tremily.us>
Am 28.03.2014 18:10, schrieb W. Trevor King:
> On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 05:57:50PM +0100, Jens Lehmann wrote:
>> Am 28.03.2014 04:58, schrieb W. Trevor King:
>>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 08:52:55PM -0700, W. Trevor King wrote:
>>>> No the remote branch is in the upstream subproject. I suppose I meant
>>>> “the submodule's remote-tracking branch following the upstream
>>>> subproject's HEAD which we just fetched so it's fairly current” ;).
>>>
>>> Hmm, maybe we should change the existing “upstream submodule” to
>>> “upstream subproject” for consistency?
>>
>> For me it's still an "upstream submodule" ...
>
> We have a few existing “[upstream] subproject” references though. I
> prefer subproject, because the submodule's upstream repository is
> likely a bare repo and not a submodule itself. It's also possible
> (likely?) that the upstream repository is a stand-alone project, and
> not designed to always be a submodule. However, “upstream submodule”
> and “submodule's upstream” are both clear enough, and if they're the
> consensus phrasing, I'd rather standardize on them than jump back and
> forth between phrasings in the docs. I can write up a patch that
> shifts us to consistently use one form, once we decide what that
> should be (although I'm happy to let someone else write the patch too
> ;).
Apart from the RelNotes there are only seven places in the
Documentation directory where the term "subproject" is used:
- Two in git-submodule.txt (which are those you recently added in
the series that introduced the regression and would be gone if
we revert that)
- One in git-write-tree.txt (but as I understand it the --prefix
option can be used to record tree objects for other tools too,
so the more generic term subproject looks OK to me there)
- Four occurrences in user-manual.txt describing the diff format
for submodules (which I assume will always stay "[+-]Subproject"
for backwards compatibility reasons)
If we do not revert your series I'll be happy to write up a patch
replacing the two usages of subproject in git-submodule.txt ;-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-31 19:32 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
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 [this message]
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=5339C29B.5030301@web.de \
--to=jens.lehmann@web.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=hvoigt@hvoigt.net \
--cc=johan@herland.net \
--cc=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
--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).