From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FSL_HELO_FAKE, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B771C4338F for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2021 20:23:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA0E060EE4 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2021 20:23:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234198AbhHMUYX (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Aug 2021 16:24:23 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34524 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233875AbhHMUYW (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Aug 2021 16:24:22 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x62e.google.com (mail-pl1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 99AB5C061756 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2021 13:23:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id f3so13510283plg.3 for ; Fri, 13 Aug 2021 13:23:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Z1Y5LQFFIs3W+2iLdcIq9zUS3BhrVeY48E+v5nF6qiI=; b=UO0nwbXxr5eK/VtX2oH99k1fjHxS85auWWPg97aEy+vQ7bJfETq7T243mKngddoXt7 kjUDx2sPgKo8eOdhmbjQhjD8endTzCQpaCWEDpZxZMbLWL6m1zB7KNW2WSMhJto4Bkab ozILIiJLusvHuegY0hE2Kvvg1Dhk5ueY3WqIBu+sppgCCNYwZwDKGenAMN8gi1X6kinE 3EP8zbwW9AA1U6MgRLFcBnuU1UM5TsmN5mQGFlZYkkigfZcl/suUM7BHmjgVbaza4g1G QpzBNf8L0R/qClZwhOPO+tY7TZT0m6gYlaIylin3/VvcrqFue2k4Dq2RjAiFE5FvVoz3 vT1g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Z1Y5LQFFIs3W+2iLdcIq9zUS3BhrVeY48E+v5nF6qiI=; b=orXpg18yhC3WsQo0sT+0Aiwef3grBU/zplFK1tL1mwhlbCFHi8JI8m7j1zKsMEW2Fa 0wwvECUymdMde+FSXYdCNeVLfU4SrHCrRVqNDkJoWz3Omqf4r9T6i3rUKD/L/WvHE0fK qa20pZqvXUvGRy9Cd32m6AW3LmrcPh6KbwEg7jT4KFuTNucH66MW4wM9F7FBmaJhFflF GWIhDIuC7re+jQJUOj0gjIj6TDkhygGn9PK8g2VbkHTT6vBEw3UMBiKahsa0/emO8udr bLvJJm/96lGrf5Wg5HWSBknCrN8y8ISRA2b5xqSi3fppdNpUPjMK50myBj3isfsA71s3 gkzg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5329GGM35yq1lp6ub6B90I+R0ybamgucHRyBVcxzdW/E5gtv6PH8 p7KsM/bcpBD0mAkYAx8GoFF2sQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxjUcBgCQ3MFb3WWVVVU05eUy15A4rw0UYwNnC5IeUaO8UwdHr/uBu1C4aEm3o8+7skRAcwBg== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:90d4:0:b029:3b3:2746:5449 with SMTP id k20-20020aa790d40000b02903b327465449mr4136851pfk.81.1628886234930; Fri, 13 Aug 2021 13:23:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2620:15c:2ce:200:258f:eefb:8f2e:157]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b8sm2660065pjo.51.2021.08.13.13.23.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 13 Aug 2021 13:23:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2021 13:23:46 -0700 From: Emily Shaffer To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Mahi Kolla via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Philippe Blain , Mahi Kolla Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] clone: set submodule.recurse=true if user enables feature.experimental flag Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 09:34:47PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Emily Shaffer writes: > > > It seems surprising to me that a user would want to clone with all the > > submodules fetched *without* intending to then use > > superproject-plus-submodules together recursively. I would like to hear > > more about the use case you have in mind, Junio. > > You may need full forest of submodules with the superproject to > build your ware (i.e. you'd probably want to clone and fetch-update > them), but you may only be working on the sources in a small subset > of submodules and do not need your recursive grep or diff to go > outside that subset, for example. You'd need to ask the people who > recursively clone and not set submodule.recurse to true (I am not > among them). > > > One scenario that did come to mind when I discussed this with Mahi is > > that a user may provide a pathspec to --recurse-submodules (that is, > > "yes, this repo has submodules a/ and b/, but I only care about the > > contents of submodule a/") - and in that case, --recurse-submodules > > seems to do the right thing with or without Mahi's change. > > Please be a bit more specific about "the right thing". Do you mean > "the submodules that matched the pathspec gets recursed into by > later operations"? > > If so, "git clone --resurse-submodules=. $from_there" may perhaps be > the "there is no way to we make this opt-in?" I have been asking > about (not "asking for")? > > > It seemed to me that trying out this change on feature.experimental flag > > was the right approach, because users with that flag have already > > volunteered to be testers for upcoming behavior changes > > Yes, if we already have a consensus that a proposed change is > something we hope to be desirable, then feature.experimental is a > good way to see if early adopters can find problems in their real > world use, as these volunteers may include audiences with different > use pattern from the original advocates of a particular feature, who > might have dogfooded the new feature to gain consensus that it may > want to become the default. > > By the way, I am not fundamentally opposed to the feature being > proposed. I would imagine that such a feature would be liked by > those who want to keep things simpler. I however am hesitant to see > it pushed too hastily without considering if it harms existing users > with different preferences. > > IOW, I was primarily reacting to the apparent wrong order in which > things are being done, first throwing this into feature.experimental > before we have gathered enough confidence that it may be a good > thing to do by having it in shipped version as an opt-in feature. Yeah, since writing my reply I was very helpfully reinformed on the convention around 'feature.experimental' by Jonathan N off-list. Thanks for being patient with me. I think the right move, then, is to explore whether your suggestion in https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqqeeaxw28z.fsf%40gitster.g is appropriate - I have the sense that it is, but I want to make sure to think it through before I say so for sure. - Emily