From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 22:37:56 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Submodule Groups
Message-ID: <xmqqpowuwocb.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79kYVE7a=kXi__+Y3C7cuQUhY78o0unuw7vU4hrO71q1dwA@mail.gmail.com>

Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:

> I think having both is bad as it may contradict each other?
> What is supposed to happen here:
>
>      [submodule "frotz"]
>          group = default
>
>      [submoduleGroup "default"]
>          member = !:frotz

What is supposed to happen is that you will write code to diagnose
this as an error, and give helpful error message to the user.

> So groups of groups, we discovered recursion today. :)
> Having this discussion makes me realize, the groups handling logic
> will be more complex than I anticipated for the first RFC patch series.

That is why I think we do not have to have a very complex group
logic from day one.

> The two basic questions the logic has to answer is:
>  * Give me all the submodules that fit these specifiers (i.e. the
>     --init-submodules collection from clone)
>  * Given submodule X, does it fit the specifier ( a new uninitialized
>     submodule during a later update)

Yes.