Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > For my part I was waiting to see what Junio would do with > "ab/submodule-no-abspath", which is already in "next". Depending on > whether it's ejected or not I'd need to re-roll > "ab/remove--super-prefix" on top of a new "master", as it extends the > tests it added. Thanks for the status update! > You noted in [1] that you strongly preferred seeing > "ab/submodule-no-abspath" ejected. I think you're right that the output > is a bit weird, but: > > A. I think it's mainly odd/unintuitive for the recursive cases, I think > outside of our own test suite absorbing repositories recursively > almost never happens. Frankly, I find it odd in the non-recursive case too e.g. in one of the non-recursive tests, we have: Migrating git directory of '\''sub1'\'' from '\''sub1/.git'\'' to '\''../../.git/modules/sub1'\'' where all 3 paths are relative, the first two share the same base but not the last one. I don't think a casual reader can easily tell that the last one should be relative to the second one. > B. I think it's an improvement in the output compared to the absolute > paths we have now, especially for the common case of non-recursive. For the reason above, this doesn't feel like an improvement to me :/ > C. Changing it made it easier to test it, which is how it ended up as a > supposedly quick prerequisite for "ab/remove--super-prefix": It's > otherwise changing a test blindspot. With abspaths, couldn't we test this with $PWD? > D. As you note in [1] the data we'd need to pass around to make it > sensible (maybe it should always be consistent with "git mv -v"?) > would require passing more state around, some of which is tricky. Yeah I think this a good to have in the long run, but let's punt on it for now. > I'd prefer to just have it graduate as-is, and build > "ab/remove--super-prefix" on top. We can always further tweak the output > later. > > But if you & Junio feel otherwise I think the best way forward would be > to eject both topics, and I'd submit a re-rolled > "ab/remove--super-prefix". A re-rolled "ab/remove--super-prefix" makes sense to me. Sorry again for not voicing my thoughts sooner and saving us from this churn :( > > Either would work as a way forward. Just let me know what you both > prefer. > > 1. https://lore.kernel.org/git/kl6l7czmec10.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
