Francis Moreau <francis.moro@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> But when we ignore untracked paths in the superproject, we should
>> ignore untracked paths in submodule working trees consistently.
>
> yes I agree.
>
> But in the short term, could you suggest a method to workaround this
> inconsistency ?
Hrm, ... didn't I already?
As we do not take untracked content at the superproject level into
account when deciding "--dirty"-ness, I think it is very sensible to
either do one of the following:
(1) always ignore untracked files in submodule working trees; or
(2) if we were to introduce some form of --ignore-submodules,
ignore untracked files in the superproject working tree when we
use that mechanism to ignore untracked files in submodule
working trees.
Strictly speaking, (1) is a degenerate case of (2).
...
I think what is missing from "--dirty" is not "--ignore-submodules",
but "--do-not-ignore-untracked" option [*1*]. "describe --dirty"
ignores untracked files in the superproject by default, and we
should ignore untracked files in submodule working trees, but the
current code does not. Fixing that is (1) above.
I think the right first step without any new option is to make
"describe --dirty" to ignore the dirtiness in submodules coming
solely from having untracked files in submodules' working trees.
You could later add --having-untracked-is-dirty option to mark the
output dirty when there is an untracked file in submodules' working
trees or the toplevel working tree, which would be the second step.
--
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