On 8/19/2021 4:09 PM, Emily Shaffer wrote:
...
> +submodule.superprojectGitDir::
> + The relative path from the submodule's worktree to its superproject's
> + gitdir. When Git is run in a repository, it usually makes no difference
> + whether this repository is standalone or a submodule, but if this
> + configuration variable is present, additional behavior may be possible,
> + such as "git status" printing additional information about this
> + submodule's status with respect to its superproject. This config should
> + only be present in projects which are submodules, but is not guaranteed
> + to be present in every submodule, so only optional value-added behavior
> + should be linked to it. It is set automatically during
> + submodule creation.
> ++
> + Because of this configuration variable, it is forbidden to use the
> + same submodule worktree shared by multiple superprojects.
nit: this paragraph linked with the "+" line should have no tabbing.
Also, could we use the same submodule worktree for multiple superprojects
_before_ this configuration variable? That seems wild to me. Or, is that
not a new requirement?
Perhaps you mean something like this instead:
It is forbidden to use the same submodule worktree for multiple
superprojects, so this configuration variable stores the unique
superproject and is not multi-valued.
> diff --git a/builtin/submodule--helper.c b/builtin/submodule--helper.c
> index d55f6262e9..d60fcd2c7d 100644
> --- a/builtin/submodule--helper.c
> +++ b/builtin/submodule--helper.c
> @@ -1910,6 +1910,10 @@ static int module_clone(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> git_config_set_in_file(p, "submodule.alternateErrorStrategy",
> error_strategy);
>
> + git_config_set_in_file(p, "submodule.superprojectGitdir",
> + relative_path(absolute_path(get_git_dir()),
> + path, &sb));
> +
I see that all new submodules will have this configuration set. But we will
also live in a world where some existing submodules do not have this variable
set. I'll look elsewhere for compatibility checks.
> inspect() {
> - dir=$1 &&
> -
> - git -C "$dir" for-each-ref --format='%(refname)' 'refs/heads/*' >heads &&
> - { git -C "$dir" symbolic-ref HEAD || :; } >head &&
> - git -C "$dir" rev-parse HEAD >head-sha1 &&
> - git -C "$dir" update-index --refresh &&
> - git -C "$dir" diff-files --exit-code &&
> - git -C "$dir" clean -n -d -x >untracked
> + sub_dir=$1 &&
> + super_dir=$2 &&
> +
> + git -C "$sub_dir" for-each-ref --format='%(refname)' 'refs/heads/*' >heads &&
> + { git -C "$sub_dir" symbolic-ref HEAD || :; } >head &&
> + git -C "$sub_dir" rev-parse HEAD >head-sha1 &&
> + git -C "$sub_dir" update-index --refresh &&
> + git -C "$sub_dir" diff-files --exit-code &&
> + cached_super_dir="$(git -C "$sub_dir" config --get submodule.superprojectGitDir)" &&
> + [ "$(git -C "$super_dir" rev-parse --absolute-git-dir)" \
> + -ef "$sub_dir/$cached_super_dir" ] &&
> + git -C "$sub_dir" clean -n -d -x >untracked
You rewrote this test in the previous patch, and now every line is changed
because you renamed 'dir' to 'sub_dir'. Could the previous patch use
'sub_dir' from the start so this change only shows the new lines instead of
many edited lines?
> }
>
> test_expect_success 'submodule add' '
> @@ -138,7 +142,7 @@ test_expect_success 'submodule add' '
> ) &&
>
> rm -f heads head untracked &&
> - inspect addtest/submod &&
> + inspect addtest/submod addtest &&
Similarly, I would not be upset to see these lines be changed just the
once, even if the second argument is ignored for a single commit. But
this nitpick is definitely less important since I could see taste
swaying things either way.
Thanks,
-Stolee
