Am 23.01.2013 18:01, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy  <> writes:
>> add_submodule_odb() can be used to import objects from another
>> repository temporarily. After this point we don't know which objects
>> are ours, which are external. If we create an object that refers to an
>> external object, next time git runs, it may find a hole in the object
>> graph because the external repository may not be imported. The same
>> goes for pointing a ref to an external SHA-1.
>> To protect ourselves, once add_submodule_odb() is used:
>>  - trees, tags and commits cannot be created
>>  - refs cannot be updated
>> In certain cases that submodule code knows that it's safe to write, it
>> can turn the readonly flag off.
>> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <>
>> ---
>>  I think this is a good safety check.
> Two step implementation to bring "read-only" support into a testable
> shape and then flip that bit in add_submdule_odb() would be a
> sensible approach.

I agree this is a worthwhile change so nobody accidentally screws
things up.

>>  It catches at least a case in
>>  t7405.3. I did not investigate further though.

This is a false positive. The merge algorithm picked a fast-forward
in a submodule as a proper merge result and records that in a
gitlink. But as Duy pointed out this could be easily fixed by
turning the readonly flag off in that case.

> I however have this suspicion that this will become a losing battle
> and we would be better off getting rid of add_submodule_odb();
> instead operations that work across repositories will be done as a
> subprocess, which will get us back closer to one of the original
> design goals of submodule support to have a clear separation between
> the superproject and its submodules.

Please don't. While I agree with your goal, I'd be unhappy to do
that because of the performance drop (especially on fork-challenged
operating systems).
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