On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 09:09:19PM +0100, Francesco Pretto wrote:
> 2014/1/7 W. Trevor King <wking@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> >> Trevor, maybe it was not clear. But I wanted to say:
> >>
> >> " I fully support *Trevor's* patch..." :)
> >
> > Which I appreciate ;). I still though I should point out that my
> > patch *confuses* the role of submodule.<name>.branch :p.
>
> You are welcome. Also, at your wish, can you please reply also in
> public?
Here you go.
I'd be happy to hear ideas about superproject-branch-specific local
overrides to a hypothetical submodule.<name>.local-branch, in the
event that a developer doesn't like a default set in .gitmodules. If
I could think of a way to do that, we could avoid this heuristic
approach, and make the local submodule.<name>.local-branch
vs. remote-tracking submodule.<name>.branch distinction more obvious.
It would also be nice if submodule.<name>.branch was just an initial
setup-time and detached-HEAD default. If the submodule is on a branch
it would make more sense to use the checked-out branch's @{upstream}.
Cheers,
Trevor
--
This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org).
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature