Re: [RFC/PATCH] clone: introduce clone.submoduleGitDir to relocate $GITDIR

From: Marc Branchaud <marcnarc@xiplink.com>
Date: Apr 16, 2013, 15:46 UTC
Message-ID: <516D723F.9070204@xiplink.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALkWK0kEQ+mCxkaqUusyaEpx350qNrJ8UPoeo7+hEVGEUbtaxQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 13-04-16 04:17 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Marc Branchaud wrote:
>> If "git add" is all about specifying what lives under paths in the worktree,
>> what's wrong with letting "git add" go beyond specifying just files?
>>
>> Syntax aside for the moment, I think a command like
>>         git add git-repo-reference foo
>> is perfectly natural:  It specifies what is inside worktree path foo.
> 
> I never said "just files".  Files, directories, symlinks and
> submodules are all "things in the worktree", and all fine.  Remote
> URLs, on the other hand, have nothing to do with the worktree.

But they have everything to do with submodules. You need a URL to identify a submodule. If you want a submodule in your worktree, at some point you have to specify the submodule's URL.

I really feel like I'm missing something here. You seem to be saying that it's wrong to let "git add" interpret a URL as a submodule. Instead you seem to want to have some other mechanism create the files, directories and symlinks that make up a submodule, so that "git add" can then operate with the purity you desire. That's what I don't understand.

As a submodule user, I want to "git add" a submodule. I don't see why it's necessary to have more than one command to do that. But if you're saying that it's fine for "git add" to work this way, then I don't see the point of the proposed change to "git clone".

M.