Hi,

On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 11:34:54PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "W. Trevor King" <wk...@tremily.us> writes:
> 
> > By remaining agnostic on the variable usage, this patch makes
> > submodule setup more convenient for all parties.
> 
> I personally do not think "remaining agnostic on the usage" is a
> good thing, at least for any option to commands at the higher level
> on the stack, such as "git submodule".  I am afraid that giving an
> easier way to set up a variable with undefined semantics may make
> setup more confusing for all parties.  One party gives one specific
> meaning to the field, while another party uses it for something
> slightly different.
> 
> I would not object to "git config submodule.$name.branch $value", on
> the other hand.  "git config" can be used to set a piece of data
> that has specific meaning, but as a low-level tool, it is not
> _limited_ to variables that have defined meaning.

I think we should agree on a behavior for this option and implement it
the same time when add learns about it. When we were discussing floating
submodules as an important option for the gerrit people I already started
to implement a proof of concept. Please have a look here:

https://github.com/hvoigt/git/commits/hv/floating_submodules

AFAIK this does not yet implement the same behaviour the gerrit tools
offer for this option. The main reason behind that was because I do not
know the typical workflow behind such an option. So I am open to
changes.

Maybe you can use or base your work on this implementation for submodule
update.

Without submodule update using this option I think it would be better to
implement this option in the tool you are using instead of submodule add.
Everything else feels incomplete to me.

Cheers Heiko
--
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