On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 10:07:43AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> > I also waffled on whether we should ask the submodule code
> > whether it knows about a particular path. Technically:
> >
> > git config submodule.foo.path foo
> > git config submodule.foo.url git://...
> > git add foo
> >
> > is legal, but would still warn with this patch. I don't know
> > how much we should care (it would also be easy to do on
> > top).
>
> And here I was thinking this is not legal, because you may override
> anything *except* submodule.*.path in the config. That is because
> all the other settings (such as url, active flag, branch,
> shallow recommendation) are dependent on the use case, the user,
> changes to the environment (url) or such. The name<->path mapping
> however is only to be changed via changes to the tracked content.
> That is why it would make sense to disallow overriding the path
> outside the tracked content.
It was probably a mistake to use normal config as the example. Junio
mentioned it as a case that could work if you communicate the submodule
URL to somebody else out-of-band. My understanding was that you could
set whatever you like in the regular config, but I think that is just
showing my ignorance of submodules.
Pretend like I said "-f .gitmodules" in each line above. ;)
> In my ideal dream world of submodules we would have the following:
>
> $ cat .gitmodules
> [submodule "sub42"]
> path = foo
> # path only in tree!
TBH, I am not sure why we need "path"; couldn't we just use the
subsection name as an implicit path?
> > + OPT_HIDDEN_BOOL(0, "warn-embedded-repo", &warn_on_embedded_repo,
> > + N_("warn when adding an embedded repository")),
>
> We do not have a lot of OPT_HIDDEN_BOOLs throughout the code base.
> We should use them more often.
>
> It makes sense though in this case.
Actually, my main reason is that it's nonsense to show
"--warn-embedded-repo" in the help, when it's already the default. I
would like to have written:
OPT_NEGBOOL(0, "no-warn-embedded-repo", &warn_on_embedded_repo,
N_("disable warning when adding an embedded repository"))
but we don't have such a thing (and the last discussion on it a few
months ago left a lot of open questions). So given that this really
isn't something I'd expect users to want, I figured hiding it was a good
idea. I mentioned it in the manpage for script writers, but it's really
not worth cluttering "git add -h".
> > +static const char embedded_advice[] = N_(
> > +"You've added another git repository inside your current repository.\n"
> > +"Clones of the outer repository will not also contain the contents of\n"
> > +"the embedded repository. If you meant to add a submodule, use:\n"
>
> The "will not also" sounds a bit off to me. Maybe:
> ...
> Clones of the outer repository will not contain the contents
> of the embedded repository and has no way of knowing how
> to obtain the inner repo. If you meant to add a submodule ...
Yeah, I think we could just strike the "also" (I played around with the
wording here quite a bit and I think it was left from an earlier attempt
where it made more sense).
Your "no way of knowing" is probably a good thing to mention.
> > +"See \"git help submodule\" for more information."
>
> Once the overhaul of the submodule documentation
> comes along[1], we rather want to point at
> "man 7 git-submodules", which explains the concepts and
> then tell you about commands how to use it. For now the
> git-submodule man page is ok.
>
> [1] https://public-inbox.org/git/20170607185354.10050-1-sbel...@google.com/
Yeah, I poked around looking for a definitive "here's how submodules
work" intro. I'm happy one is in the works, and I agree this should
point there once it exists.
> > +++ b/t/t7414-submodule-mistakes.sh
> > @@ -0,0 +1,40 @@
> > +#!/bin/sh
> > +
> > +test_description='handling of common mistakes people may make with
> > submodules'
>
> That is one way to say it. Do we have other tests for
> "you think it is a bug, but it is features" ? ;)
> I like it though. :)
Heh. I didn't know how else to lump it together. Just "test git add on a
repository" felt like too little for its own script. I almost added it
to t7400, but I think that script is plenty long enough as it is (it's
also one of the longest-running scripts, I think).
> > +test_expect_success 'create embedded repository' '
> > + git init embed &&
> > + (
> > + cd embed &&
> > + test_commit one
> > + )
>
> shorter via:
>
> test_create_repo embed &&
> test_commit -C embed one
>
> (and saves a shell IIRC)
Right, I forgot we added -C there. Will change.
> Thanks for these tests.
>
> This patch looks good to me, apart from the perceived wording nits.
Thanks. I'll re-roll with a few tweaks based on your feedback.
-Peff
