Re: [RFC] require-work-tree wants more than what its name says
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- May 5, 2011, 17:31 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v39kt9hr7.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <BANLkTinaoopUxOHC0XaUxMLXj4pCXND+UA@mail.gmail.com>
Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com> writes:
> So do we need more tests for git-submodule to find out, or is this a > hint to the submodule people to chime in? If so, should they be cc-ed?
I could queue a version without any conversion of in-tree users, so that stakeholders can verify and convert their use of require-work-tree to the new saner alternative one by one. Actually I tend to like that better.
I am not convinced myself if it is a sane use case to run "git pull" from a totally random place and let fetch and merge magically happen somewhere completely unrelated to your current working directory only because you have GIT_DIR and GIT_WORK_TREE set to begin with. After getting into a habit of relying on these environment variables so much that you do not even think about their existence, you will reach a point where you have no idea where to go offhand when a merge conflict actually happens and you have to go there to fix things up.