Re: [PATCH/WIP 03/11] t5403: avoid doing "git add foo/bar" where foo/.git exists

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Oct 26, 2011, 17:26 UTC
Message-ID: <7vr51z3bqx.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8CjJnO6rDVTV1tC9rWXP51LHBtUvNsgVWNfwC+HuNQ-6Q@mail.gmail.com>

Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:

> Now look from "git add" perspective, it does not really care where
> $GIT_DIR is.
> It assumes that $(pwd) is working directory's top. So it

Now you confused me.

Doesn't it use $GIT_DIR to find the index? And it decides that it is at the top level because it is given GIT_DIR but not GIT_WORKING_TREE which is how working tree discovery is defined.

Show 9 quoted lines

>  - reads content of current directory, it sees "clone2" as a directory
>  - it descends in and see ".git" so "clone2" must be a git link
>  - because clone2 is a separate repository (again $GIT_DIR is not
> consulted), "b" should be managed by "clone2"
>  - so it stops.
>
> This is the only place I see a submodule (from the first glance) is
> actually top level repository. Yes I guess we can support this, but
> it's just too weird to be widely used in pratice..

Where did you get this idea that submodule is somehow involved in this test?

I do not see there is any submodules involved; the test uses two repositories 1 and 2 that appear in the working tree of the main repository test infrastructure created, but otherwise there is no sub/super relation among these three, and there are many other tests with "clone" or "mkdir+init" or "init <newdir>" in the main test repository.

The clone2 repository tracks a path without having a corresponding file in its working tree (i.e. it has "b" but tracks "clone2/b") which I already is said unusual, but unusual does not mean it is bad or we want to remove a test that covers the unusual case to let a change that regresses the case go unnoticed.

Show 11 quoted lines

>> Running (cd clone2 && git add b) is a _more natural_ thing to do, and it
>> will result in a path "b" added to the clone2 repository, so that the
>> result is more useful if you are going to chdir to the repository and keep
>> working on it. But that does not mean the existing test is incorrect. It
>> does not just pass somehow but the test passes by design.
>>
>> I did not check if later tests look at the contents of commit "new2" to
>> make sure it contains "clone2/b", but if they do this change should break
>> such tests.
>>
>> So I am puzzled by this change; what is this trying to achieve?

So again, what is this change trying to achieve?