Hi,
Stefan Beller wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> submodule-config.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> submodule-config.h | 11 +++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+)
Yay, this is much clearer. Thanks for indulging.
[...]
> +++ b/submodule-config.c
[...]
> @@ -311,6 +313,26 @@ static int parse_config(const char *var, const char *value, void *data)
> + else if (!skip_prefix(value, "!", &submodule->update_command))
> + die(_("invalid value for %s"), var);
Should this say
else if (skip_prefix(value, "!", &submodule->update_command))
submodule->update = SM_UPDATE_COMMAND;
else
die(...);
?
[...]
> --- a/submodule-config.h
> +++ b/submodule-config.h
> @@ -4,6 +4,15 @@
> #include "hashmap.h"
> #include "strbuf.h"
>
> +enum submodule_update_type {
> + SM_UPDATE_CHECKOUT,
> + SM_UPDATE_REBASE,
> + SM_UPDATE_MERGE,
> + SM_UPDATE_NONE,
> + SM_UPDATE_COMMAND,
> + SM_UPDATE_UNSPECIFIED
> +};
If _UNSPECIFIED is equal to 0, that would futureproof this better
against zero-initialized submodule structs without ->update explicitly
set.
After those two changes and the whitespace change Junio suggested,
Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx>
--
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