Re: [PATCH v8 2/3] introduce submodule.hasSuperproject record

[Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com>]

On Mon, Feb 28, 2022 at 11:00:57PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
> Emily Shaffer <emilyshaffer@google.com> writes:
> 
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Note location of superproject's gitdir. Because the submodule already
> > +	 * has a gitdir and local config, we can store this pointer from
> > +	 * worktree config to worktree config, if the submodule has
> > +	 * extensions.worktreeConfig set.
> > +	 */
> 
> Probably the comment is a bit stale.  There is no longer a pointer
> or location of superproject's gitdir recorded anywhere.

Thanks. I considered replacing it with a new comment about "now we'll
note that it's got a superproject", but I think that's clear enough from
the config set line, so I deleted the comment entirely.

> 
> > +	strbuf_addf(&config_path, "%s/config", real_new_git_dir);
> > +	git_configset_init(&sub_cs);
> > +	git_configset_add_file(&sub_cs, config_path.buf);
> > +
> > +	git_config_set_in_file(config_path.buf, "submodule.hasSuperproject",
> > +			       "true");
> > +
> > +	git_configset_clear(&sub_cs);
> > +	strbuf_release(&config_path);
> > +	strbuf_release(&sb);
> >  	free(old_git_dir);
> >  	free(real_old_git_dir);
> >  	free(real_new_git_dir);
> > diff --git a/t/t7400-submodule-basic.sh b/t/t7400-submodule-basic.sh
> > index 40cf8d89aa..833fa01961 100755
> > --- a/t/t7400-submodule-basic.sh
> > +++ b/t/t7400-submodule-basic.sh
> > @@ -115,6 +115,10 @@ inspect() {
> >  	git -C "$sub_dir" rev-parse HEAD >head-sha1 &&
> >  	git -C "$sub_dir" update-index --refresh &&
> >  	git -C "$sub_dir" diff-files --exit-code &&
> > +
> > +	# Ensure that submodule.hasSuperproject is set.
> > +	git -C "$sub_dir" config "submodule.hasSuperproject"
> 
> Are we sufficiently happy to see the variable is set to anything, or
> do we require it to be set to boolean true?
> 
> If the former, the above is fine, with trailing && added.
> 
> If the latter, then something like
> 
> 	val=$(git config --type=bool "submodule.hasSuperproject") &&
> 	test "$val" = true &&
> 
> would be more appropriate, but I wonder something like
> 
> test_config_is () {
> 	local var expect val
> 	var="$1" expect="$2"
> 	shift 2
>         val=$(git "$@" config --type=bool "$var") &&
> 	test "$val" = "$expect"
> }
> 
> would be in order.  That would allow us to write
> 
> 	test_config_is submodule.hasSuperproject true -C "$sub_dir" &&
> 

This seemed neat, so I started to look into implementing it, and found
`test_cmp_config()` which takes additional args to pass to `git config`
- so I should be able to achieve this same thing with
`test_config_is -C "$sub_dir" --type=bool true submodule.hasSuperproject`.

> >  	git -C "$sub_dir" clean -n -d -x >untracked
> >  }
> >  
> > diff --git a/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh b/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh
> > index 11cccbb333..422c3cc343 100755
> > --- a/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh
> > +++ b/t/t7406-submodule-update.sh
> > @@ -1061,4 +1061,12 @@ test_expect_success 'submodule update --quiet passes quietness to fetch with a s
> >  	)
> >  '
> >  
> > +test_expect_success 'submodule update adds submodule.hasSuperproject to older repos' '
> > +	(cd super &&
> > +	 git -C submodule config --unset submodule.hasSuperproject &&
> 
> Are we testing that submodule.hasSuperproject is set, and that
> it can successfully be unset?  "config --unset no.such.var" will
> exit with non-zero status.
> 
> > +	 git submodule update &&
> > +	 git -C submodule config submodule.hasSuperproject
> 
> Ditto.

Ah, thanks.