From: Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2017 19:30:19 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/2] ls-files: only recurse on active submodules
Message-ID: <CA+P7+xq7VUAT3pLahj72YUnF3zDm2u-ZBFu6TxWRYcJCc0c=Ew@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79kaRTrgHMnP6mA3V2rDHzf8iOidqLTpp2aXmi6x+6YeZxw@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com> wrote:
>>>> Add in a check to see if a submodule is active before attempting to
>>>> recurse.  This prevents 'ls-files' from trying to operate on a submodule
>>>> which may not exist in the working directory.
>>>
>>> What would currently happen on recursing into non-active submodules?
>>> Can we have a test for this?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Stefan
>>
>> We should be able to test for this. Is it possible that we can recurse
>> into a submodule as long as we have the clone in .git/modules/<name>
>> even if we don't have it checked out currently?
>
> Conceptually that should be possible, e.g.
>
>     git ls-files --recurse-submodules <ancient ref>
>
> where the ancient ref contained submodules that are not present any more.
> In that case we would need to do
>
>     struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
>     struct child_process = CHILD_PROCESS_INIT;
>     struct submodule *sub = submodule_from_path( \
>         <path as recorded in ancient tree>, <ancient ref>)
>     strbuf_git_path(&sb, "modules/%s", sub->name);
>
>     argv_array_pushl(&cp.args, "git", "ls-files", "--recurse", ...);
>     cp.dir = sb.buf;
>     run_command(&cp);
>
> Stefan

This is probably the right flow to use then.

Thanks,
Jake