Re: What should "git submodule summary" give before an initial commit?
- From
Johan Herland <johan@herland.net>
- Date
- Mar 3, 2010, 23:10 UTC
- Message-ID
- <201003040010.19061.johan@herland.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vhboxf4nx.fsf_-_@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Wednesday 03 March 2010, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 43 quoted lines
> "git status" collects the changes for both the index (since HEAD) and the
> working tree files (since the index), summarizes and shows them. When it
> is run before the first commit is made, it uses a logic different from
> the one used in the normal case to gather the information on the index,
> as we don't have HEAD yet, i.e. instead of "diff-index HEAD", we would
> run "diff-index emtpy-tree".
>
> How should status.submodulesummary integrate into this framework?
>
> Currently, it blindly runs "git submodule summary", and it gives an extra
> error message about HEAD not being a commit, and people (me included)
> misguidedly have spent time on squelching the message.
>
> But I think that was _all wrong_. I do not think "git submodule summary"
> should fail even when you haven't made your first commit.
>
> If you are before the first commit, we say everything you have in the
> index is a change you are adding with your next commit (which will be
> your initial one). If you added a submodule commit to the index,
> shouldn't "git submodule summary" say "you'll be committing the addition
> of this subproject"? IOW, shouldn't we be comparing an empty tree to
> find added submodules, like this, when we haven't made the first commit?
>
> git-submodule.sh | 4 ++--
> 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/git-submodule.sh b/git-submodule.sh
> index 5869c00..0397f9d 100755
> --- a/git-submodule.sh
> +++ b/git-submodule.sh
> @@ -556,10 +556,10 @@ cmd_summary() {
> if rev=$(git rev-parse -q --verify --default HEAD ${1+"$1"})
> then
> head=$rev
> - shift
> + test $# = 0 || shift
> elif test -z "$1" -o "$1" = "HEAD"
> then
> - return
> + head=4b825dc642cb6eb9a060e54bf8d69288fbee4904
> else
> head="HEAD"
> fiAcked-by: Johan Herland <johan@herland.net>
If you're planning to revert 3deea89 (although the above patch suggests you're not), then please don't revert the t7401 testcases added by that commit. The testcase is useful in any case.
...Johan
-- Johan Herland, <johan@herland.net> www.herland.net