From: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 00:18:51 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH/WIP 03/11] t5403: avoid doing "git add foo/bar" where foo/.git exists
Message-ID: <CACsJy8CjJnO6rDVTV1tC9rWXP51LHBtUvNsgVWNfwC+HuNQ-6Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vd3dk516p.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

2011/10/26 Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>:
> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy  <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> In this case, "foo" is considered a submodule and bar, if added,
>> belongs to foo/.git. "git add" should only allow "git add foo" in this
>> case, but it passes somehow.
>
> I do not think the above description is correct.
>
> The test:
>
>  - populates the current directory;
>  - makes a clone in ./clone2;
>  - creates a file clone2/b;
>  - runs "git add clone2/b" with GIT_DIR set to clone2/.git, without
>   setting GIT_WORK_TREE nor having core.worktree in clone2/.git/config.
>
> The last step should add a path "clone2/b" to $GIT_DIR/index (which is
> clone2/.git/index in this case).  The clone2 is not a submodule to the top
> level repository in this case, but even if it were, that would not change
> the definition of what the command should do when GIT_DIR is set without
> GIT_WORK_TREE nor core.worktree in $GIT_DIR/config.

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

 - 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..

> 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?
-- 
Duy