Re: Extending "extended SHA1" syntax to traverse through gitlinks?
- From
Jakub Narębski <jnareb@gmail.com>
- Date
- Aug 24, 2016, 17:05 UTC
- Message-ID
- <165ac159-29e8-10d1-49ee-e5ff6543d0d2@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20160824142024.xnaehfo2spw26apj@x>
W dniu 24.08.2016 o 16:20, Josh Triplett pisze:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 03:16:56PM +0200, Jakub Narębski wrote:
[...]
Show 19 quoted lines
>> Not really.
>>
>> The above means only that the support for new syntax would be not
>> as easy as adding it to 'git rev-parse' (and it's built-in equivalent),
>> except for the case where submodule uses the same object database as
>> supermodule.
>>
>> So it wouldn't be as easy (on conceptual level) as adding support
>> for ':/<text>' or '<commit>^{/<text>}'. It would be at least as
>> hard, if not harder, as adding support for '@{-1}' and its '-'
>> shortcut.
>
> Depends on which cases you want to handle. In the most general case,
> you'd need to find and process the applicable .gitmodules file, which
> would only work if you started from the top-level tree, not a random
> treeish. On the other hand, in the most general case, you don't
> necessarily even have the module you need, because .git/modules only
> contains the modules the *current* version needed, not every past
> version.There is an additional problem, namely that directory with submodule can be renamed.
I don't know if there is an existing API, but assuming modern git-submodule (with repository in .git/modules) you would have to do the following steps for <revision>:<path/to/submodule>//<path>:
* look up <revision>:.gitmodules for module which 'path' is <path/to/submodule>; let's say it is named <submodule> * check if <revision>:<path/to/submodule> commit object is present in .git/modules/<submodule> * look up this object
In the case of legacy submodule setup, with submodule repository in the supermodule working directory, you would need: * look up <revision>:.gitmodules for module which 'path' is <path/to/submodule>; let's say it is named <submodule> * look up current .gitmodules for current path of submodule named <submodule>; let's say it is <new/path/submodule> * check of <revision>:</path/to/submodule> commit object is present in :(top)<new/path/submodule>/.git repository * look up this object
You could also check if the submodule repository (as stored in config) is a path, and use it if it is... but that might be going to far.
BTW. all that reminds me that gitweb should handle submodules better.
> As an alternate approach (pun intended): treat every module in > .git/modules as an alternate and just look up the object by hash.
This could be a good fallback, to search through all submodules.
> Or, teach git-submodule to store all the objects for submodules in the > supermodule's .git/objects (and teach git's reachability algorithm to > respect refs in .git/modules, or store their refs in > .git/refs/submodules/ or in a namespace).
And fallback to this fallback could be searching through supermodule object repository.
Storing all objects in single repository is counter to the design decision of submodules (though I don't remember what it was), but it might be done. Still, Git needs to be able to deal with legacy situations anyway.
Show 9 quoted lines
>> Josh, what was the reason behind proposing this feature? Was it >> conceived as adding completeness to gitrevisions syntax, a low-hanging >> fruit? It isn't (the latter). Or was it some problem with submodule >> handling that you would want to use this syntax for? > > This wasn't an abstract/theoretical completeness issue. I specifically > wanted this syntax for practical use with actual trees containing > gitlinks, motivated by having a tool that creates and uses such > gitlinks. :)
Could you explain what you need in more detail? Is it a fragment of history of submodule, a contents of a file at given point of superproject history, diff between file-in-submodule and something else, or what?
Show 16 quoted lines
>> As for usefulness: this fills the hole in accessing submodules, one >> that could be handled by combining plumbing-level commands. Namely, >> there are 5 states of submodule (as I understand it) >> >> * recorded in ref / commit in supermodule >> * recorded in the index in supermodule >> - recorded in ref / commit in submodule >> - recorded in the index in submodule >> - state of worktree in submodule >> >> The last three can be easyly acessed by cd-ing to submodule. The first >> two are not easy to get, AFAIUC. > > Right. I primarily care about those first two cases, especially the > first one: given a commit containing a gitlink, how can I easily dig > into the linked commit?
All right.
Though you can cobble it with plumbing... just saying.
-- Jakub Narębski