Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > +interngitdirs:: > + Move the git directory of submodules into its superprojects > + `$GIT_DIR/modules` path and then connect the git directory and > + its working directory by setting the `core.worktree` and adding > + a .git file pointing to the git directory interned into the > + superproject. > ++ > + A repository that was cloned independently and later added > + as a submodule or old setups have the submodules git directory > + inside the submodule instead of the > ++ > + This command is recursive by default. Does this format correctly? I somehow thought that second and subsequent paragraphs continued with "+" want no indentation before them. See for example the Values section in config.txt and see how entries for boolean:: and color:: use multiple '+' paragraphs. If we do not have to refrain from indenting the second and subsequent paragraphs, that would be great for readability, but I take the existing practice as telling me that we cannot do that X-<. > +test_expect_success 'setup a gitlink with missing .gitmodules entry' ' > + git init sub2 && > + test_commit -C sub2 first && > + git add sub2 && > + git commit -m superproject > +' > + > +test_expect_success 'intern the git dir fails for incomplete submodules' ' > + test_must_fail git submodule interngitdirs && > + # check that we did not break the repository: > + git status > +' It is not clear what the last "git status" wants to test. In the extreme, if the failed "git submodule" command did rm -fr .git ?* && git init wouldn't "git status" still succeed? What are the minimum things that we expect from "did not break" to see? sub2/.git is still a directory and is a valid repository? The contents of the .git/modules/* before and after the "git submodule" does not change? Some other things?