From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] better git-submodule status output Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2008 16:21:00 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <20080701150119.GE5852@joyeux> <7vhcb3o7q3.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080706160758.GA23385@jhaampe.org> <20080707062142.GA5506@jhaampe.org> <32541b130807070725p6fa4d0dfne9f04bc857920dc7@mail.gmail.com> <20080707145726.GI3696@joyeux> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Avery Pennarun , Junio C Hamano , Lars Hjemli , Ping Yin , Mark Levedahl , git@vger.kernel.org To: Sylvain Joyeux X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jul 07 17:24:17 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KFsZI-0004q0-3K for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:23:56 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753765AbYGGPW6 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:22:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753784AbYGGPW5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:22:57 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:45953 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753685AbYGGPW5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jul 2008 11:22:57 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 07 Jul 2008 15:22:54 -0000 Received: from grape.st-and.ac.uk (EHLO grape.st-and.ac.uk) [138.251.155.28] by mail.gmx.net (mp062) with SMTP; 07 Jul 2008 17:22:54 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18gT7MghcUgh4Hr7xfQjk0VcC1KTMHAlw1SJHQse8 Irpo8/rOxENmFt X-X-Sender: gene099@racer In-Reply-To: <20080707145726.GI3696@joyeux> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.71 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Mon, 7 Jul 2008, Sylvain Joyeux wrote: > > > Thus, I'd say the best fix would be to find a way to have "git pull" or > > > "git fetch" in the supermodule also do a fetch in the submodule. > > If I am actively working on the submodule, the supermodule has _no > > business_ trying to wreck my state. > > Is it possible to make 'fetch' only .. well .. fetch objects, without > updating any refs ? In that case it would wreck no state as no state > would be updated. You have no business sneaking a fetch into an operation that does not need one. Period. If that is _still_ not enough to convince you: think about sitting in a plane, high above the clouds. Yes, we try to support that mode of operation. Hthf, Dscho