Re: Relative submodule URLs vs. clone URL DWIMming
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Aug 30, 2008, 22:27 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vhc92f8ay.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <200808290101.20048.johan@herland.net>
Johan Herland <johan@herland.net> writes:
> ... But AFAICS, there's no way to get this information from the > transport layer. I assume that the actual repo location is resolved on the > remote side, and simply not communicated back to the local side.
Correct.
Show 7 quoted lines
> If we simply resolve submodule URLs against the _repo_ (i.e. the real origin > URL) and not the work tree (if any), we get results that are coupled to > whether we use bare or non-bare repos: Take, for example, your use > of "../<path>" to make submodules live outside the (bare) superproject. If I > now create a non-bare clone of this, I must move the submodule repos _into_ > my work tree, so that the submodule repos are available, if someone tries to > clone from me.
I personally feel that cases that involve cloning from non-bare repositories (and in addition, DWIMmed repositories), with or without nested submodules, are not worth supporting.