Any further comments on this or changes I should make so it can be merged? The current code behavior does not match the documentation, so something should be changed. If these changes are not desired, I could submit an alternative patch that changes the documentation to clarify what currently happens instead. On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 8:05 AM <rsbecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wednesday, July 3, 2024 1:00 AM, Bruce Perry wrote: > >Perhaps I was using imprecise terminology. This change should not impact whether > >submodule clones land in a detached head state, so it should not impact anything > >that assumes submodule clones are detached head. > > > >The change being made is this: "git clone --recurse-submodules --shallow- > >submodules" currently gives you a submodule with a detached head at the desired > >state, but also downloads data for the tips of all branches in the remote being > >cloned (potentially a lot of unneeded data as in my use case). The modification > >means the same command would give you a detached head at the desired state, > >plus the tip of only the default branch in the remote. The modified behavior > >matches the current behavior for a simple "git clone" followed by "git submodule > >update --init --recurse--submodules --depth=1". > > > >Thanks, > >Bruce > > > >(Resent due to a formatting failure) > > > >On Tue, Jul 2, 2024, 1:12 PM <rsbecker@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On Tuesday, July 2, 2024 3:08 PM, Bruce Perry wrote: > >> >I noticed a couple places where the behavior of recursive clones for > >> >shallow submodules does not match what is implied by the > >> >documentation. Shallow submodules should be, but aren't, single > >> >branch by default. It would also be useful to allow users to override > >> >the shallow specification in gitmodules on the command line for > >> >clones as they can for submodule update. The modification here for the former is > >a bit ugly, but hopefully at least gets the point across to start a discussion. > >> >First time submitting a patch here, hopefully I'm getting the process right. > >> > > >> >Bruce Perry (2): > >> > clone: shallow-submodules should be single-branch by default > >> > clone: no-shallow-submodules clone overrides option in gitmodules > >> > > >> > Documentation/git-clone.txt | 3 ++ > >> > Documentation/gitmodules.txt | 4 +-- > >> > builtin/clone.c | 10 ++++-- > >> > t/t5614-clone-submodules-shallow.sh | 52 > >> > +++++++++++++++++++++++------ > >> > 4 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > >> > > >> > > >> >base-commit: daed0c68e94967bfbb3f87e15f7c9090dc1aa1e1 > >> >Published-As: > >> >https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-git- > >> >1740%2Fbaperry2%2Fsubmods-clone-bug-v1 > >> >Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-git- > >> >1740/baperry2/submods-clone-bug-v1 > >> >Pull-Request: https://github.com/git/git/pull/1740 > >> > >> I am concerned about this one. Many CI systems (including Jenkins GitSCM) > >assume a detached head for submodule clone/checkout. Adding a branch to the mix > >will change the expected semantics. Am I missing something? > > Thanks for clearing that up. Fine with me. > Regards > Randall >
