On 04/18, Stefan Beller wrote: > v2: > * improved commit message to be proper English (Thanks, Philip!) > * clarified why the patch 2 is so short (i.e. it doesn't matter if the submodule > is initialized in the preparation repo, we care about the actual testing repo! > Thanks, Brandon) That was the only thing I was unsure about in v1. v2 lgtm. > * reworded patch 1 (Thanks Jonathan) > > Thanks, > Stefan > > v1: https://public-inbox.org/git/20170411234923.1860-1-sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > Now that the BIG one has landed, e394fa01d6 (Merge branch > 'sb/checkout-recurse-submodules', 2017-03-28), you would expect that > teaching to recurse into submodules is easy for all the remaining > working tree manipulations? > > It turns out it is. See the last patch how we teach git-reset to recurse > into submodules. > > However when thinking more about what git-reset is expected to do, > I added tests and some fixes for them (patch 2+3). > > patch 1 is a correctness thing, required for patch 3. > > Thanks, > Stefan > > Stefan Beller (4): > entry.c: submodule recursing: respect force flag correctly > submodule.c: uninitialized submodules are ignored in recursive > commands > submodule.c: submodule_move_head works with broken submodules > builtin/reset: add --recurse-submodules switch > > builtin/reset.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > entry.c | 8 ++++---- > submodule.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > t/lib-submodule-update.sh | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++--- > t/t7112-reset-submodule.sh | 8 ++++++++ > unpack-trees.c | 7 ++++++- > 6 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-) > > -- Brandon Williams