Brandon Williams writes:
>> If you are in a subdirectory of your superproject, say, a/,
>>
>> cd a && git ls-files --recurse-submodules -- "b*"
>>
>> I would expect we would recurse into the submodule at "a/b" and find
>> "b/file-at-top-of-B". What does the internal invocation to do so
>>
On 09/27, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Brandon Williams writes:
>
> > Well maybe...I don't really know much about how the prefix interacts in
> > every scenario but would what you describe still work if we are in a sub
> > dir of the superproject (which contains other directorys and perhaps a
> > subm
Brandon Williams writes:
> Well maybe...I don't really know much about how the prefix interacts in
> every scenario but would what you describe still work if we are in a sub
> dir of the superproject (which contains other directorys and perhaps a
> submodule) and execute a --recurse-submodules co
On 09/27, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > What we internally call "prefix" and "--submodule-prefix" is closely
> > related in that they both interact with pathspecs. "prefix" gets
> > prepended to elements of an end-user supplied pathspec before a
> > full-path-in-the-repository (i.e. a path in the inde
As this is relevant to what to call the prefix thing that is passed
down to an internal re-invocation of ls-files and how to explain it
to end-users...
Junio C Hamano writes:
> I agree that this is not specific to submodules; this is closely
> related to what we internally call "prefix", but is
On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 12:34 AM, Stefan Beller wrote:
> git -C path/to/sub --keep-prefix ls-files
Note that the above can also be written like so (and works
identically), due to the fact that -C can be given multiple times:
git -C path -C to -C sub --keep-prefix ls-files
nazri
On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Brandon Williams wrote:
>> Yeah, a positive "I support this" flag would at least let us correctly
>> flag errors, which is the best we can do. That won't work for
>> non-builtins, but perhaps it is good enough in practice.
>>
>> -Peff
>
>
> So it sounds like we agr
> Yeah, a positive "I support this" flag would at least let us correctly
> flag errors, which is the best we can do. That won't work for
> non-builtins, but perhaps it is good enough in practice.
>
> -Peff
So it sounds like we agree that this prefix option should be pushed to
the top level.
The q
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:47:17PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Jeff King wrote:
>
> >> * As Stefan alluded to (much) earlier, it might be a better idea
> >>to have these 'prefix' as the global option to "git" potty, not
> >>to each subcommand that happ
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Jeff King wrote:
>> * As Stefan alluded to (much) earlier, it might be a better idea
>>to have these 'prefix' as the global option to "git" potty, not
>>to each subcommand that happens to support them;
>
> That seems like it would be nice, but there's goi
On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 11:13:13AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> In any case, I would strongly recommend against exposing this (or
> anything for that matter) "--prefix" to the end-user, especially
> because this feature is likely to be applicable to many subcommands,
> and some subcommands would
Jeff King writes:
> Should this option just be "--prefix", or maybe "--output-prefix"?
> Submodules are the obvious use case here, but I could see somebody
> adapting this for other uses (alternatively, if we _do_ want to keep it
> just as an implementation detail for submodules, we should probab
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:18 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 04:13:22PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Brandon Williams writes:
>>
>> > yes you mentioned this and I meant to change that before sending it out.
>> > Looks like it slipped through have slipped through.
>>
>> I alrea
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 04:13:22PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Brandon Williams writes:
>
> > yes you mentioned this and I meant to change that before sending it out.
> > Looks like it slipped through have slipped through.
>
> I already fixed it up locally when I sent the reply, but thanks f
Brandon Williams writes:
> yes you mentioned this and I meant to change that before sending it out.
> Looks like it slipped through have slipped through.
I already fixed it up locally when I sent the reply, but thanks for
resending (which assures me that your local copy is up-to-date and I
do no
yes you mentioned this and I meant to change that before sending it out.
Looks like it slipped through have slipped through.
Brandon Williams writes:
> This is another version of the first ls-files patch i sent out in
> order. In this version I fixed the option
> name to be '--submodule-prefix'.
I understand that many internal changes in your work environment are
titled like "DOing X", but our convention around here
This is another version of the first ls-files patch i sent out in
order. In this version I fixed the option
name to be '--submodule-prefix'.
Allow ls-files to recognize submodules in order to retrieve a list of
files from a repository's submodules. This is done by forking off a
process to recursively call ls-files on all submodules. Also added a
submodule-prefix command in order to prepend paths to child processes.
Signed-off-by: Bran
19 matches
Mail list logo