Re: Re: [RFC] What to you think about a loose status for submodules?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 12:58:04PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Heiko Voigt <hvoigt@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > I am not sure what is the best way to create such a group mapping using
> > our config files though. I would like to allow multiple groups/views to
> > have the submodules like:
> > What do you think?
> 
> That, or alternatively:
> 
>     [submodule "doc"]
>         path = Documentation
> 
>     [submodule "help"]
>         path = help
> 
>     [submodule "core"]
>         path = core
> 
>     [submodule "app"]
>         path = app
> 
>     [view "default"]
>         modules = core app
> 
>     [view "doc"]
>         modules = core doc help

Even though there has not been much more work on this item the idea has
become much clearer for me since the last discussion. Now that sparse
checkout is in master I would like to generalize this idea a little
further.

How about adding this to .gitattributes so it can be used for any
file/directory? E.g.:

.gitattributes:
/core           view=default, doc
/app            view=default
/Documentation  view=doc
*.loc           view=doc, default

which could then  be utilized by

  git checkout --view=doc

for example. If no view is given we default to everything.

Does the current sparse implementation work with submodule entries as
well? Then it could be even more straightforward to implement than the
previous idea.

cheers Heiko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]