From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
Cc: Antony Male <antony.male@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, iveqy@iveqy.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Submodules always use a relative path to gitdir
Date: Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:11:30 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7vlipllmfh.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F0629C6.9010908@web.de> (Jens Lehmann's message of "Thu, 05 Jan 2012 23:52:54 +0100")
Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> writes:
> So in the long run I suspect we might have to change core git anyways
> to make moving submodules easy for the user (surely "git mv" and maybe
> also the setup and gitfile code). Does that make more sense?
If you need to change "git mv" anyway to help moving submodule checkout,
then how gitfile points into .git/modules/ hierarchy of the superproject
becomes an implementation detail the end users should not have to care
about.
What does "if we reached thru a gitfile, then the working tree is where
you found that gitfile" really solve? The way you found that gitfile is by
traversing the directory hierarchy upwards from a subdirectory of a
working tree of a submodule, and you already know where the top of that
working tree is, no?
And the heuristics would not work if somebody goes into the $GIT_DIR/ that
governs the submodule as going upwards from there will not hit gitfile, so
we would need help from core.worktree anyway. A non-submodule setting that
uses gitfile would need to worry about core.worktree, too, so I'd rather
avoid loading more heuristics to gitfile handling unless there is a clear
advantage for doing so, which I am not really seeing here.
That is not really a "If not" below (i.e. I am not saying it is _not_ OK.
I am saying I don't know what the advantage of that approach is), but ...
> If not I'm fine with just setting core.worktree to a relative path in
> the git-submodule.sh script (like I did for the gitfile). And I'll look
> into teaching "git mv" about submodules right after that.
... teaching "git mv" may be a good move, I would think. I do think keeping
core.worktree pointing at the right directory is necessary, but I do not
see much point in making it a relative path, though.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-06 0:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-12-29 21:00 [PATCH] Submodules always use a relative path to gitdir Antony Male
2011-12-29 22:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-12-31 21:28 ` Phil Hord
2012-01-03 18:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-01-03 19:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-01-01 14:58 ` Jens Lehmann
2012-01-03 18:27 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-01-03 22:10 ` Jens Lehmann
2012-01-03 22:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-01-05 22:52 ` Jens Lehmann
2012-01-06 0:11 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2012-01-06 14:26 ` Phil Hord
2012-01-06 15:07 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2012-01-06 18:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-12-29 22:48 ` Fredrik Gustafsson
2011-12-31 20:31 ` Phil Hord
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=7vlipllmfh.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=Jens.Lehmann@web.de \
--cc=antony.male@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=iveqy@iveqy.com \
/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).