On Thu, Aug 3, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Brandon Williams <bmwill@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The function 'submodule_from_name()' is being used incorrectly here as a
> submodule path is being used instead of a submodule name. Since the
> correct function to use with a path to a submodule is already being used
> ('submodule_from_path()') let's remove the call to
> 'submodule_from_name()'.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brandon Williams <bmwill@xxxxxxxxxx>
In case a reroll is needed, you could incorperate Jens feedback
stating that 851e18c385 should have done it.
> ---
> submodule.c | 2 --
> 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/submodule.c b/submodule.c
> index 5139b9256..19bd13bb2 100644
> --- a/submodule.c
> +++ b/submodule.c
> @@ -1177,8 +1177,6 @@ static int get_next_submodule(struct child_process *cp,
> continue;
>
> submodule = submodule_from_path(&null_oid, ce->name);
> - if (!submodule)
> - submodule = submodule_from_name(&null_oid, ce->name);
>
> default_argv = "yes";
> if (spf->command_line_option == RECURSE_SUBMODULES_DEFAULT) {
> --
> 2.14.0.rc1.383.gd1ce394fe2-goog
>
