From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] unpack-trees.c: assume submodules are clean during check-out Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2007 23:02:01 -0700 Message-ID: <7vbqdmh63q.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <20070717182828.GA4583MdfPADPa@greensroom.kotnet.org> <7vy7he6ufj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20070801140532.GC31114MdfPADPa@greensroom.kotnet.org> <7v643vj316.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <8c5c35580708040441ue1c3ef8qc022912a5af4883e@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: skimo@liacs.nl, "Sven Verdoolaege" , git@vger.kernel.org, "Eran Tromer" To: "Lars Hjemli" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Aug 05 08:02:27 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IHZC4-0004DW-TA for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 05 Aug 2007 08:02:25 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751850AbXHEGCG (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Aug 2007 02:02:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751838AbXHEGCF (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Aug 2007 02:02:05 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao101.cox.net ([68.230.241.45]:41751 "EHLO fed1rmmtao101.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751819AbXHEGCE (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Aug 2007 02:02:04 -0400 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao101.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.01 201-2186-121-102-20070209) with ESMTP id <20070805060202.JJZW2095.fed1rmmtao101.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Sun, 5 Aug 2007 02:02:02 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id Y6211X0071kojtg0000000; Sun, 05 Aug 2007 02:02:02 -0400 In-Reply-To: <8c5c35580708040441ue1c3ef8qc022912a5af4883e@mail.gmail.com> (Lars Hjemli's message of "Sat, 4 Aug 2007 13:41:06 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Lars Hjemli" writes: > On 8/4/07, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> As we explicitly allow >> submodule checkout to drift from the supermodule index entry, >> the check should say "Ok, for submodules, not matching is the >> norm" for now. Later when we have the ability to mark "I care >> about this submodule to be always in sync with the superproject" >> (thereby implementing automatic recursive checkout and perhaps >> diff, among other things), we should check if the submodule in >> question is marked as such and perform the current test. > > Yes, this sounds like a sane plan (and a good explanation of the > current semantics: maybe something to include in the release notes for > 1.5.3?) The submodule Porcelain is a new thing in 1.5.3, so we would need a good description of what the current rules are and what our vision for future enhancement will be. I am not certain however the above is the accurate description of the current design and the direction we would want to go, though. Somebody needs to sanity check me.