diff options
author | Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> | 2020-06-10 23:16:49 +0000 |
---|---|---|
committer | Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> | 2020-06-12 17:21:05 -0700 |
commit | e7d7c73249bf68be1fd912db045dcb4b6a0b6570 (patch) | |
tree | 116bc9a4da71b559cb268fdd4523b50ad08c80ac /t/t9131-git-svn-empty-symlink.sh | |
parent | Git 2.26 (diff) | |
download | tgif-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/t9131-git-svn-empty-symlink.sh')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions