From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiko Voigt Subject: Re: [PATCH] [submodule] Add depth to submodule update Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 00:11:32 +0200 Message-ID: <20130625221132.GB4161@sandbox-ub> References: <1371974698-28685-1-git-send-email-iveqy@iveqy.com> <20130624224925.GC32270@paksenarrion.iveqy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com, Jens Lehmann To: Fredrik Gustafsson X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jun 26 00:11:43 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UrbSg-0001HQ-Ig for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 00:11:42 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751727Ab3FYWLj (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jun 2013 18:11:39 -0400 Received: from smtprelay03.ispgateway.de ([80.67.31.37]:38838 "EHLO smtprelay03.ispgateway.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751267Ab3FYWLi (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jun 2013 18:11:38 -0400 Received: from [77.20.34.36] (helo=sandbox-ub) by smtprelay03.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1UrbSY-0002pj-Fh; Wed, 26 Jun 2013 00:11:34 +0200 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130624224925.GC32270@paksenarrion.iveqy.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Df-Sender: aHZvaWd0QGh2b2lndC5uZXQ= Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:49:25AM +0200, Fredrik Gustafsson wrote: > Used only when a clone is initialized. This is useful when the submodule(s) > are huge and you're not really interested in anything but the latest commit. > > Signed-off-by: Fredrik Gustafsson I this is a valid use case. But this option only makes sense when a submodule is newly cloned so I am not sure whether submodule update is the correct place. Let me think about this a little more. Since we do not have any extra command that initiates the clone this is probably the only place we can put this option. But at the moment it does not feel completely right. Apart from that the code looks good. If the user does a checkout of a revision that was not fetched submodule update will error out the same way as if someone forgot to push his submodule changes. So that should not be a problem. Cheers Heiko