On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > Lars Hjemli <hje...@gmail.com> writes: > >>> Come to think of it, is there a reason why "for-each-repo" should >>> not be an extention to "submodule foreach"? We can view this as >>> visiting repositories that _could_ be registered as a submodule, in >>> addition to iterating over the registered submodules, no? >> >> Yes, but I see some possible problems with that approach: >> -'git for-each-repo' does not need to be started from within a git worktree > > True, but "git submodule foreach --untracked" can be told that it is > OK not (yet) to be in any superproject, no?
Yes. > >> -'git for-each-repo' and 'git submodule foreach' have different >> semantics for --dirty and --clean > > That could be a problem. Is there a good reason why they should use > different definitions of dirtyness? I suspected that 'submodule foreach --dirty' might want to compare the HEAD sha1 in the submodule against the one recorded in the superproject (similar to what 'git submodule status' does), but such a check could be triggered by a different flag (e.g. --behind/--ahead or something similar). >> -'git for-each-repo' is in C because my 'git-all' shell script was >> horribly slow on large directory trees (especially on windows) > > Your for-each-repo could be a good basis to build a new builtin > "submodule--foreach" that is a pure helper hidden from the end users > that does both; cmd_foreach() in git-submodule.sh can simply delegate > to it. Ok, I'll rework my patches in this direction. Thanks. -- larsh -- 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