On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Brandon Williams <bmwill@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> You're right that seems like the best course of action and it already falls
>> inline with what I did with a first patch to ls-files to support submodules.
>> In that patch I did exactly as you suggest and pass in the prefix to the
>> submodule and make the child responsible for prepending the prefix to all of
>> its output. This way we can simply pass through the whole pathspec (as apposed
>> to my original idea of stripping the prefix off the pathspec prior to passing
>> it to the child...which can get complicated with wild characters) to the
>> childprocess and when checking if a file matches the pathspec we can check if
>> the prefix + file path matches.
>
> That's brilliant. A few observations.
>
> * With that change to tell the command that is spawned in a
> submodule directory where the submodule repository is in the
> context of the top-level superproject _and_ require it to take a
> pathspec as relative to the top-level superproject, you no longer
> worry about having to find where to cut the pathspec given at the
> top-level to adjust it for the submodule's context. That may
> simplify things.
I wonder how this plays together with the prefix in the superproject, e.g.
cd super/unrelated-path
# when invoking a git command the internal prefix is "unrelated-path/"
git ls-files ../submodule-*
# a submodule in submodule-A would be run in submodule-A
# with a superproject prefix of super/ ? but additionally we nned
to know we're
# not at the root of the superproject.
> So we may have to rethink what this option name should be. "You
> are running in a repository that is used as a submodule in a
> larger context, which has the submodule at this path" is what the
> option tells the command; if any existing command already has
> such an option, we should use it. If we are inventing one,
> perhaps "--submodule-path" (I didn't check if there are existing
> options that sound similar to it and mean completely different
> things, in which case that name is not usable)?
Would it make sense to add the '--submodule-path' to a more generic
part of the code? It's not just ls-files/grep that have to solve exactly this
problem. Up to now we just did not go for those commands, though.
Thanks