From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 18:45:19 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] entry.c: submodule recursing: respect force flag correctly
Message-ID: <20170329184519.GW31294@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170329183743.27506-1-sbeller@google.com>

Stefan Beller wrote:

> In case of a non-forced worktree update, the submodule movement is tested
> in a dry run first, such that it doesn't matter if the actual update is
> done via the force flag. However for correctness, we want to give the
> flag is specified by the user.

"for correctness" means "to avoid races"?

> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
> ---
>  entry.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/entry.c b/entry.c
> index d2b512da90..645121f828 100644
> --- a/entry.c
> +++ b/entry.c
> @@ -287,7 +287,7 @@ int checkout_entry(struct cache_entry *ce,
>  			} else
>  				return submodule_move_head(ce->name,
>  					"HEAD", oid_to_hex(&ce->oid),
> -					SUBMODULE_MOVE_HEAD_FORCE);
> +					state->force ? SUBMODULE_MOVE_HEAD_FORCE : 0);

Looks like a good change.

This moves past the 80-column margin.  I wish there were a tool like
gofmt or clang-format that would take care of formatting for us.

This isn't the only place SUBMODULE_MOVE_HEAD_FORCE is used in the
file.  Do they need the same treatment?

Thanks,
Jonathan