On 02/20/2017 01:21 PM, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 7:11 PM, Michael Haggerty <mhag...@alum.mit.edu> > wrote: >> On 02/18/2017 02:33 PM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: >>> Since submodule or not is irrelevant to files-backend after the last >>> patch, remove the parameter from files_downcast() and kill >>> files_assert_main_repository(). >>> >>> PS. This implies that all ref operations are allowed for submodules. But >>> we may need to look more closely to see if that's really true... >> >> I think you are jumping the gun here. >> >> Even after your changes, there is still a significant difference between >> the main repository and submodules: we have access to the object >> database for the main repository, but not for submodules. >> >> So, for example, the following don't work for submodules: >> >> * `parse_object()` is used to ensure that references are only pointed at >> valid objects, and that branches are only pointed at commit objects. >> >> * `peel_object()` is used to write the peeled version of references in >> `packed-refs`, and to peel references while they are being iterated >> over. Since this doesn't work, I think you can't write `packed-refs` in >> a submodule. >> >> These limitations, I think, imply that submodule references have to be >> treated as read-only. > > Behind the scene submodule does add_submodule_odb(), which basically > makes the submodule's odb an alternate of in-core odb. So odb access > works. I was puzzled how submodules could by pass odb access at the > beginning only to find that out. technical/api-ref-iteration.txt also > mentions that you need to add_submodule_odb(), so I think it's > deliberate (albeit hacky) design.
That's interesting. I didn't know it before. But I still don't think that means that reference writing can work correctly. If I try to set a submodule branch to an SHA-1 and I verify that the SHA-1 points to a valid commit, how do I know that the commit is in the same submodule that holds the reference? > [...] Michael
