Re: [PATCH 0/4] Submodule Groups

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jan 21, 2016, 22:18 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq37tqy3t4.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79ka+LZHRjVB8bZ4u+-n-U06mUWsbx9nRVCvd4aPwrb7yHQ@mail.gmail.com>

Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:

Show 17 quoted lines

> Instead of having a submodule -> set assignment, we could do it the
> other way round:
>
>      [submodule "gcc"]
>          ...
>
>      [submodule-set "default"]
>         submodule = gcc
>         submodule = foo
>         submodule = by/path/*
>
> This may be more handy from our perspective (while designing it and
> writing the code),
> but I'd assume this is less useful for the user. How often does a user ask:
> "How many/Which submodules are in $GROUP" as opposed to "What about
> submodule foo,
> is that part of group $GROUP?"

I suspect that we will end up needing to support both styles. The latter style is easier when you want to express a larger set as a collection of groups, e.g.

    [submodule "gcc"]
    	group = development-tools

    [submodule "emacs"]
    	group = editors

    [submodule "frotz"]
        group = games

    [submoduleGroup "default"]
        member = *development-tools
        member = *editors
        member = :frotz
	member = !*xyzzy

might be a way to say "the default group includes everything in the 'development-tools' or 'editors' group, plus 'frotz' module, but do not include modules in the xyzzy group" or something like that.