On Sun, May 20, 2007 at 10:54:44PM +0200, Alex Riesen wrote: > Sven Verdoolaege, Sun, May 20, 2007 21:59:30 +0200: > > > I am very worried about this big red switch that says "all > > > subprojects to be cloned and checked out, or nothing". I think > > > this would not work well with projects that truly need > > > superproject support (i.e. very large ones, where most people > > > would not want to clone and check out every single subproject). > > > > It's pretty easy to add a "submodule.*.skip" or "submodule.*.ignore". > > Since the subcloning only happens at checkout, you could set these > > before doing a checkout. > > And set them back after doing the checkout? What do you mean? Why would you set them back? I guess I'm missing something. > Me too. I actually believe it is the only way to do it. How can you > checkout a subproject to something else (to what a branch may point) > and to what the tree of superproject has? On the other side (in > subproject) - why are you, the superproject, allowed to screw the > references of the subproject?! It is independent, isn't it?! Well... the subproject as a whole is independent of the superproject, but the checkout in the superproject is not entirely independent. > > > - What would we do when the subproject working tree is not > > > clean? > > > > I was planning on adding a --dry-run to git-checkout. > > The superproject would run this in each subproject before > > doing the actual checkout of the superproject. > > Why not do exactly what we do now? Pass "-m" down to it, if it was > given to the top-level git-checkout. We want to be sure that all (selected) subprojects can be updated before updating any, no? skimo - 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
