Re: [PATCHv6 1/2] submodule tests: don't use itself as a submodule

> Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
>
>> This provides an easier way to have submodules in tests, by just setting
>> TEST_CREATE_SUBMODULE to a non empty string, similar to
>> TEST_NO_CREATE_REPO.
>
> Yuck.
>
> I find it doubtful that it is a good idea to create two submodule
> repositories by merely dot-including the test-lib.sh; I find it
> doubly doubtful that it is a good idea to make test_create_repo
> pay attention to the special variable to implement that.
>
> I am OK with a solution where callers that set TEST_CREATE_SUBMODULE
> variable in this patch to instead have an explicit call
>
>         test_create_repo --submodule pretzel
>
> That would be a lot more obvious.

>
> The primary reason why I hate the implementation in this patch is
> that it is very easy for a test that says TEST_CREATE_SUBMODULE
> upfront, only to get the initial test repository (which everybody
> else gets) with two test submodules, to later gain a test that wants
> to use a separate repository and call "test_create_repo".  It will
> always get the pretzel submodules, which may or may not match what
> the test writer who adds a new test needs.

>
>> Make use of it in those tests that add a submodule from ./. except for
>> the occurrence in create_lib_submodule_repo as there it seems we craft
>> a repository deliberately for both inside as well as outside use.
>
> But isn't the point of this change that use of ./. cannot be
> mimicking any real-world use, hence pointless for the purpose of
> really testing the components of the system?  If "we craft
> deliberately for both inside and outside use" indeed _IS_ a good
> thing, then perhaps use of ./. has practical real-world use---if
> not, wouldn't we want to fix the scripts that include the
> lib-submodule-repo helper not to test such an unrealistic layout?
>