Re: Add an option to automatically submodule update on checkout

From: Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com>
Date: May 8, 2017, 16:48 UTC
Message-ID: <20170508164821.GA179149@google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79kaES-3ftadorYnx2wMDc-q7qsG376E1zy-C67Ldt2BO5g@mail.gmail.com>

On 05/08, Stefan Beller wrote:

Show 19 quoted lines

> On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 7:42 AM, Randall S. Becker
> <rsbecker@nexbridge.com> wrote:
> > On May 6, 2017 4:38 AM Ciro Santilli wrote:
> >> This is a must if you are working with submodules, otherwise every
> >> git checkout requires a git submodule update, and you forget it,
> >> and things break, and you understand, and you go to stack overflow
> >> questions
> >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/22328053/why-doesnt-git-checkout-automatically-do-git-submodule-update-recursive
> >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4611512/is-there-a-way-to-make-git-pull-automatically-update-submodules
> >> and you give up and create aliases :-)
> 
> The upcoming release (2.13) will have "git checkout
> --recurse-submodules", which will checkout the submodules at the
> commit as recorded in the superproject.
> 
> I plan to add an option "submodule.recurse" (name is subject to
> bikeshedding), which would make the --recurse-submodules flag given by
> default for all commands that support the flag. (Currently cooking we
> have reset --recurse-submodules, already existing there is push/pull).

Well pull not so much...it'll do a recursive fetch but not a recursive merge/rebase. That is something on the docket to get done in the next couple months though.

Show 21 quoted lines

> 
> > I rather like the concept of supporting --recurse-submodules. The
> > complexity is that the branches in all submodules all have to have
> > compatible semantics when doing the checkout, which is by no means
> > guaranteed. In the scenario where you are including a submodule from
> > a third-party (very common - see gnulib), the branches likely won't
> > be there, so you have a high probability of having the command fail
> > or produce the same results as currently exists if you allow the
> > checkout even with problems (another option?). If you have control
> > of everything, then this makes sense.
> 
> I am trying to give the use case of having control over everything (or
> rather mixed) more thought as well, e.g. "checkout
> --recurse-submodules -b <name>" may want to create the branches in a
> subset of submodules as well.
> 
> Thanks, Stefan
> 
> >
> > Cheers, Randall
> >

-- 
Brandon Williams