Re: [PATCH] Add git-submodule command

["Lars Hjemli" <hjemli@gmail.com>]

On 5/25/07, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 May 2007, Lars Hjemli wrote:
> > On 5/25/07, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 25 May 2007, Lars Hjemli wrote:
> > > > +             die "Unable to find current revision of submodule '$path'"
> > > > +
> > > > +             if test "$subsha1" != "$sha1"
> > > > +             then
> > > > +                     $(cd "$path" && git-fetch && git-checkout -q
> > > "$sha1") ||
> > >
> > > This will make a detached HEAD, right? Do you want that? (I am not
> > > really interested in submodules myself, so I haven't thought about it,
> > > and I haven't followed that monster discussion.)
> >
> > Well, we might want to be smarter about this, but on the other hand: if
> > the user cares, he can always do 'cd $path && git checkout $branch',
> > since 'git submodule -u' will skip submodules with the correct commit
> > checked out.
>
> Fair enough, I guess...

The only alternative I can think of is to check if module.$path.branch
is specified in .gitmodules: if it is, and it's pointing at the wanted
sha1, the right thing would be to checkout that branch. Any other sort
of dwim is bound to get it wrong.


>
> > > I'll let Junio comment on that command line parsing...
> >
> > Heh, I'm a shell illiterate...
>
> ;-)
>
> I guess Junio would like one of his famous
>
>         case ,"$init","$update",[...] in
>         *1*1) usage
>         esac
>
> to prevent running with two actions...

Ahh, that's something I can handle


>
> > > All in all, I like it: it is short, to the point, and it should do the
> > > job (maybe with a few enhancements like "--update" without arguments
> > > means _all_ submodules).
> >
> > Well, it does (or should) update all initialized submodules, but maybe
> > that's not what you meant?
>
> Oops. I meant "init".

Hmm, it does (or should) clone all submodules if you run 'git
submodule --init' (no paths specified). Did it fail for you?


-- 
larsh