From: Scott Kyle <scott@appden.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 21:17:06 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] completion: Add PS1 configuration for submodules
Message-ID: <AANLkTinnH4pFaEf=e4YE64f7cwLRx2R_2o_-=JGua30b@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4CFEA249.907@web.de>

On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> wrote:
> Am 07.12.2010 21:31, schrieb Kevin Ballard:
>> On Dec 7, 2010, at 4:15 AM, Ęvar Arnfjörš Bjarmason wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 00:22, Scott Kyle <scott@appden.com> wrote:
>>>> For those who often work on repositories with submodules, the dirty
>>>> indicator for unstaged changes will almost always show because development
>>>> is simultaneously happening on those submodules. The config option
>>>> diff.ignoreSubmodules is not appropriate for this use because it has larger
>>>> implications.
>>>
>>> Wouldn't it be a lot better to instead add support for showing
>>> submodule dirtyness as distinct from the main tree's dirtyness? Then
>>> you could easily spot if you had either your tree / submodule tree
>>> changes, without just ignoring them.
>>
>> That sounds like a good idea, but it doesn't necessarily have to come with
>> this patch. Scott's use case here is he has a submodule that is _always_ dirty,
>> and he simply doesn't want to see that stuff in the PS1. Having an option to
>> show it separately would be very useful for me, but should perhaps be written
>> as a separate patch.
>
> I'm not sure if I understand your case correctly, but if there is only one
> submodule that is always dirty and everybody knows that but nobody cares,
> won't it make sense to change the "submodule.<name>.ignore" config option
> for that peculiar submodule via .git/config or .gitmodules?
>

If I set the "submodule.<name>.ignore" then diffing around inside my
history will not show the changes to that particular submodule.  That
is what I meant by diff.ignoreSubmodules having larger implications.