On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 09:39:34PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "W. Trevor King" <wk...@tremily.us> writes:
> > On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 04:49:09PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> >> "W. Trevor King" <wk...@tremily.us> writes:
> >> ...
> >> > I think it's best to have users craft their own commit messages
> >> > explaining why the branch was updated.  That said, an auto-generated
> >> > hint (a la "git merge") would probably be a useful extra feature.
> >> 
> >> I am not quite sure I agree.  When the project says "Use the tip of
> >> 'bar' branch for the submodule 'foo'" at the top-level, does an
> >> individual user who is not working on the submodule 'foo' but merely
> >> is using it have any clue as to why the submodule's 'foo' branch
> >> 'foo' moved, or does he necessarily even care?
> >
> > If he doesn't care, why is he updating the submodule gitlink?
> He may not be updating the gitlink with "git add foo" at the
> top-level superproject level.  He is just using that submodule as
> part of the larger whole as he is working on either the top-level or
> some other submodule.  And checkout of 'foo' is necessary in the
> working tree for him to work in the larger context of the project,
> and 'foo' is set to float at the tip of its 'bar' branch.  And that
> checkout results in a commit that is different from the commit the
> gitlink suggests, perhaps because somebody worked in 'foo' submodule
> and advanced the tip of branch 'bar'.

The superproject gitlink should only be updated after

  $ git submodule update --pull

A plain

  $ git submodule update

would still checkout the previously-recorded SHA, not the new upstream
tip.  The uncaring user should skip the "--pull", and there will be no
superproject changes to worry about.

> Or are you envisioning that such a check-out will and should show a
> local difference at the submodule 'foo' by leaving the index of the
> top-level superproject unchanged,

A plain "git submodule update" will, yes.  And this will clobber any
changes that have happened in the submodule directory and its index
(because the user explicitly asked to checkout the
superproject-recorded SHA)

> and the user should refrain from using "git commit -a" to avoid
> having to describe the changes made on the 'bar' branch in the
> meantime in his top-level commit?

What would "git commit -a" be picking up?  Nothing in the superproject
has changed?

> That is certainly fine by me (I am no a heavy submodule user to
> begin with), but I am not sure if that is useful and helpful to the
> submodule users.

The benefit is that Ævar's

  $ git submodule foreach 'git checkout $(git config --file 
$toplevel/.gitmodules submodule.$name.branch) && git pull'


  $ git submodule update --pull

Still an explicit pull, but much easier to remember.

This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org).
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to