On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 02:41:57PM +0200, Lars Hjemli wrote:
I think the whole point of the 'remote config' stuff is to get an
unversioned/out-of-tree .gitmodules file, right?
Yes.
If so, one could put this file into the object db and refer to it with
something like 'refs/tags/subproject-config' or even
'refs/misc/subproject-config'. Both of these refs will be found by
ls-remote and point to the object containing the suggested subproject
configuration.
That's a possibility, but then...
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 01:43:54PM +0200, Sven Verdoolaege wrote:
Or do you propose we put the URL in a blob and put the object sha1
in there. If so, who's going to create these blobs for the git://
and ssh:// protocols? upload-pack?
I don't think you can expect the user to this herself.
skimo
On 5/24/07, Sven Verdoolaege [off-list ref] wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 02:41:57PM +0200, Lars Hjemli wrote:
quoted
I think the whole point of the 'remote config' stuff is to get an
unversioned/out-of-tree .gitmodules file, right?
Yes.
quoted
If so, one could put this file into the object db and refer to it with
something like 'refs/tags/subproject-config' or even
'refs/misc/subproject-config'. Both of these refs will be found by
ls-remote and point to the object containing the suggested subproject
configuration.
That's a possibility, but then...
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 01:43:54PM +0200, Sven Verdoolaege wrote:
quoted
Or do you propose we put the URL in a blob and put the object sha1
in there. If so, who's going to create these blobs for the git://
and ssh:// protocols? upload-pack?
I don't think you can expect the user to this herself.
Well, my point would be that we already have the necessary plumbing to
solve the problem (discovery and distribution of out-of-tree objects).
Some porcelain support on top of this is all that is needed (well,
almost. I just tried downloading my own tarball, and got an error
about the ref not pointing to a commit. But that shouldn't be too hard
to fix)
--
larsh