summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/t/chainlint/here-doc.expect
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorLibravatar Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>2020-06-10 23:16:49 +0000
committerLibravatar Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>2020-06-12 17:21:05 -0700
commite7d7c73249bf68be1fd912db045dcb4b6a0b6570 (patch)
tree116bc9a4da71b559cb268fdd4523b50ad08c80ac /t/chainlint/here-doc.expect
parentGit 2.26 (diff)
downloadtgif-e7d7c73249bf68be1fd912db045dcb4b6a0b6570.tar.xz
git-sparse-checkout: clarify interactions with submodules
Ignoring the sparse-checkout feature momentarily, if one has a submodule and creates local branches within it with unpushed changes and maybe adds some untracked files to it, then we would want to avoid accidentally removing such a submodule. So, for example with git.git, if you run git checkout v2.13.0 then the sha1collisiondetection/ submodule is NOT removed even though it did not exist as a submodule until v2.14.0. Similarly, if you only had v2.13.0 checked out previously and ran git checkout v2.14.0 the sha1collisiondetection/ submodule would NOT be automatically initialized despite being part of v2.14.0. In both cases, git requires submodules to be initialized or deinitialized separately. Further, we also have special handling for submodules in other commands such as clean, which requires two --force flags to delete untracked submodules, and some commands have a --recurse-submodules flag. sparse-checkout is very similar to checkout, as evidenced by the similar name -- it adds and removes files from the working copy. However, for the same avoid-data-loss reasons we do not want to remove a submodule from the working copy with checkout, we do not want to do it with sparse-checkout either. So submodules need to be separately initialized or deinitialized; changing sparse-checkout rules should not automatically trigger the removal or vivification of submodules. I believe the previous wording in git-sparse-checkout.txt about submodules was only about this particular issue. Unfortunately, the previous wording could be interpreted to imply that submodules should be considered active regardless of sparsity patterns. Update the wording to avoid making such an implication. It may be helpful to consider two example situations where the differences in wording become important: In the future, we want users to be able to run commands like git clone --sparse=moduleA --recurse-submodules $REPO_URL and have sparsity paths automatically set up and have submodules *within the sparsity paths* be automatically initialized. We do not want all submodules in any path to be automatically initialized with that command. Similarly, we want to be able to do things like git -c sparse.restrictCmds grep --recurse-submodules $REV $PATTERN and search through $REV for $PATTERN within the recorded sparsity patterns. We want it to recurse into submodules within those sparsity patterns, but do not want to recurse into directories that do not match the sparsity patterns in search of a possible submodule. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Diffstat (limited to 't/chainlint/here-doc.expect')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions