Am 01.12.2012 18:49, schrieb W. Trevor King: > I think removing `init` will cause some compatibility issues anyway, > so I was re-imaging how you do it. I don't think update='none' and > "don't populate my submodule" are distinct ideas, while a locally > configured url="somwhere" and "please populate my submodule" are (with > the blank-url case defaulting to the superproject itself). Why would we want to remove "init"? It still has to copy the "url" setting (and it would be a compatibility nightmare if we would change that, imagine different git versions used on the same work tree). >> What real world problems do we have with the current init/sync that >> this approach would solve? > > I don't have any, but in my `update --remote` series I'm adding two > new config options that are handled differently (define in > .gitmodules, override in superproject .git/config) than existing > submodules options. No, they're not. They are just handled differently than "url" and "update", but will behave just like "fetchRecurseSubmodules" and "ignore" do since day one. And as I explained in another mail I think "url" is special and "update" should be change to behave like the other two some day. -- 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