Re: [PATCH 2/2] git-submodule: support 'rm' command.
|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Am 26.06.2012 21:12, schrieb Phil Hord: > On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@xxxxxx> wrote: >> Am 25.06.2012 22:53, schrieb Phil Hord: >>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:58 PM, Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@xxxxxx> wrote: >>>> Am 25.06.2012 12:57, schrieb Michał Górny: >>>>> Add an 'rm' command to git-submodule which provides means to >>>>> (semi-)easily remove git submodules. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Michał Górny <mgorny@xxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> --- >>>>> Right now, it requires the submodule checkout to be removed manually >>>>> first (so it does not remove unstaged commits), and just removes >>>>> the index entry and module information from config. >>>>> >>>>> I based it on 'cmd_add' code trying to preserve the original coding >>>>> standards. >>>> >>>> I really like the goal of this patch but would prefer that "git rm" >>>> learns how to remove submodules instead of adding more code to the >>>> git-submodule.sh script. >>> >>> I would like to see both supported, eventually. That is, git-rm and >>> git-submodule-rm should both work. It would make sense to me when I >>> am looking for the counterpart to 'git submodule add' to find it under >>> 'git submodule rm', and also under 'git submodule --help'. >> >> Hmm, as long as "git submodule rm" would just use "git rm" under the >> hood and not its own scripting that would be ok. > > Maybe it would be better if 'git-rm' would use 'git submodule rm' > under the covers. This would keep the .gitmodules (etc.) > manipulations out of the hair of the git-rm machinery. I disagree, me thinks submodules should become first class citizens. > Also, I hope 'git submodule rm foo' would fail if 'foo' were not a submodule. Yes, it should. But that'd be easy to test there. >>> In the special case of a submodule which does not use a gitfile, I am >>> not even sure if any of the submodule files should be removed. If they >>> are, what state does that leave the submodule repository in? A >>> checked-out workdir whose files are all removed? 'git-status' would >>> be very noisy in this case. I'd rather expect this to behave the same >>> as if I checked out a previous commit which did not have the submodule >>> added yet. Today, this leaves the submodule in-place and it shows up >>> as an untracked file. I don't know a better way to handle that, >>> though I expect it would be ok remove all the files even in this case >>> (if the workdir is not dirty and if the head commit is current in the >>> superproject). But it seems extreme to do all of that and then leave >>> the .git directory lying about in the former submodule directory. >> >> Good point. Another option would be to move the git directory into >> .git/modules of the superproject before removing the files, then next >> time it's updated it'll use gitfile. But maybe that's a problem which >> will go away anyways as all submodules cloned with newer git use >> gitfiles anyway. > > I like this idea, but it seems a little presumptuous. The new > behavior might cause a few panicked users to spend the day rebuilding > their "lost" repository. Me thinks we should teach "git rm" only to remove the submodule when the --recurse-submodules option is used with it (which is what "git submodule rm" would do). Then later the to be added "autoupdate" submodule config setting (which I intend to use for automatic submodule updates during checkout, merge, etc. too) could enable this. No surprises for users who didn't ask for it. > Maybe we can make this an explicit action. > "git submodule convert-to-gitfile" :-) I like it! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Newbies FAQ] [Linux Kernel Development] [Free Online Dating] [Gcc Help] [IETF Annouce] [DCCP] [Netdev] [Networking] [Security] [V4L] [Bugtraq] [Free Online Dating] [Photo] [Yosemite] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Linux SCSI] [Fedora Users] [Linux Resources]