Hello Junio, I noticed the 1.5.2.3 tag and the plans for 1.5.3-rc1 and I was wondering when do you think you'll apply your submodule patch? Is there any way I can help with it? Thanks, Emil. This e-mail, and any associated attachments have been classified as: -------------------------------------------------------------------- [x] Public [ ] Freescale Semiconductor Internal Use Only [ ] Freescale Semiconductor Confidential Proprietary -----Original Message----- From: git-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:git-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Medve Emilian-EMMEDVE1 Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2007 8:01 AM To: git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: RE: [PATCH] git-submodule: Try harder to describe the status of a submodule Hello Junio, Alright, let's go with your patch. Cheers, Emil. This e-mail, and any associated attachments have been classified as: -------------------------------------------------------------------- [x] Public [ ] Freescale Semiconductor Internal Use Only [ ] Freescale Semiconductor Confidential Proprietary -----Original Message----- From: Junio C Hamano [mailto:gitster@xxxxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2007 11:25 PM To: Medve Emilian-EMMEDVE1 Cc: git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-submodule: Try harder to describe the status of a submodule Emil Medve <Emilian.Medve@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Some repositories might not use/have annotated tags (for example repositories created with > git-cvsimport) or might not have tags at all and could cause git-submodule status to fail because > git-describe might fail. > > This change makes git-submodule status try harder in displaying the status of a module by > considering lightweight tags, subsequent tags and branches. Why are we suddenly seeing these loooooooong lines... > +get_revname() > +{ > + _revname=$(git-describe --tags "$1" 2>/dev/null || git-describe --contains "$1" 2>/dev/null) > + if test -z "$_revname" -o "$_revname" = "undefined" > + then > + _revname=$(git-describe --all "$1" 2>/dev/null | cut -d / -f2-) > + test -z "$_revname" && _revname=undefined > + fi I really do not think using --all is useful. If you do not have a tag and the rev cannot be described, what damage does it incur? We still say "$sha1 $path" in the output anyway, and ($revname) is only "it makes it nicer" appendix. > @@ -155,7 +174,7 @@ modules_list() > say "-$sha1 $path" > continue; > fi > - revname=$(unset GIT_DIR && cd "$path" && git-describe $sha1) > + revname=$(unset GIT_DIR && cd "$path" && get_revname $sha1) > if git diff-files --quiet -- "$path" > then > say " $sha1 $path ($revname)" In that sense, I would prefer mine much better. If a rev is indescribable, your version would say: " dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd subdir (undefined)" while mine would have said: " dddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd subdir" - 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 - 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
