Am 01.12.2012 18:49, schrieb W. Trevor King:
> I think removing `init` will cause some compatibility issues anyway,
> so I was re-imaging how you do it.  I don't think update='none' and
> "don't populate my submodule" are distinct ideas, while a locally
> configured url="somwhere" and "please populate my submodule" are (with
> the blank-url case defaulting to the superproject itself).

Why would we want to remove "init"? It still has to copy the "url"
setting (and it would be a compatibility nightmare if we would change
that, imagine different git versions used on the same work tree).

>> What real world problems do we have with the current init/sync that
>> this approach would solve?
> I don't have any, but in my `update --remote` series I'm adding two
> new config options that are handled differently (define in
> .gitmodules, override in superproject .git/config) than existing
> submodules options.

No, they're not. They are just handled differently than "url" and
"update", but will behave just like "fetchRecurseSubmodules" and
"ignore" do since day one. And as I explained in another mail I
think "url" is special and "update" should be change to behave like
the other two some day.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to