On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 6:00 PM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com> 
> wrote:
>> From: Jacob Keller <jacob.kel...@gmail.com>
>> A few suggestions from Stefan in regards to falling back to
>> .git/modules/<path> being a bad idea. I've chosen I think to avoid using
>> die() as we just stick with the current path if we can't find its name.
> Which makes the existing bug more subtle :(
>> I think this should be safe since we already do this today.
> It's a bug today already. Thanks for spotting!
>> The new flow
>> only changes if we are able to lookup the submodule, so I don't think
>> it's worth adding a die() call.
> Well this series improves the buggy-ness as it is only buggy when the name
> is not found, and we fall back on the path.

Which should fail because we already failed to read the file correctly
previously to this?

What should the correct behavior be?

We need to support a few things I think:

a) checked out and initialized submodule

b) initialized submodule which is no longer checked out

c) repository checked out but not initialized, (ie: a fresh clone that
is then added via "git add" after the fact (?)

Any other scenarios we care about?

What about:

cloned, added, then the files removed.. should we actually die() in this case?

Any other things we need to handle?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to