> On 21 Aug 2017, at 20:21, Brandon Williams <bmw...@google.com> wrote:
>
> On 08/21, Stefan Beller wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Lars Schneider
>> <larsxschnei...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 21 Aug 2017, at 18:55, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 9:20 AM, Heiko Voigt <hvo...@hvoigt.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> So I am a bit curious to learn which part of this change you dislike
>>>>>> and why.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am also curious. Isn't this the same strategy we are using in other
>>>>> places?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I dislike it because the UX feels crude. When reading the documentation,
>>>> it seems to me as if submodule.<name> can be one of the following
>>>>
>>>> (none, checkout, rebase, merge, !<custom-command>)
>>>>
>>>> This is perfect for "submodule-update", whose primary goal is
>>>> to update submodules *somehow*. However other commands
>>>>
>>>> git rebase --recurse
>>>> git merge --recurse
>>>> git checkout --recurse
>>>>
>>>> have a different primary mode of operation (note how their name
>>>> is one of the modes from the set above), so it may get confusing
>>>> for a user.
>>>>
>>>> 'none' and '!<custom-command>' seem like they would be okay
>>>> for any of the commands above but then:
>>>>
>>>> git config submodule.<name>.update "!..."
>>>> git reset --hard --recurse
>>>> git status
>>>> # submodule is reported, because "!..." did not 'reset'.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway. That dislike is just a minor gut feeling about the UX/UI
>>>> being horrible. I wrote the patch to keep the conversation going,
>>>> and if it fixes Lars problem, let's take it for now.
>>>
>>> Well, I need just a way to disable certain Submodules completely.
>>> If you show me how "git config --local submodule.sub.active false"
>>> works then I don't need this patch.
>
> Yeah if you want to completely disable a submodule (as in not even check
> it out) then setting .active to false would do that. But as stefan
> pointed out and IIRC 'submodule update --init' with no pathspec sets all
> submodules to be active. Perhaps it should only init submodules who
> don't already have an explicit active flag set.
OK. I change my scripts to use ".active" and it seems to work nicely.
I noticed one oddity, though:
If I clone a repo using `git clone --recursive <url>` then the local
Git config of the repo gets the following entry:
[submodule]
active = .
Is this intentional? Something in the git/git test harness seems to prevent
that. I was not able to write a test to replicate the issue.
Any idea?
Thanks,
Lars
