This patch aims to detangle (a) the usage of `git-submodule`
from (b) the concept of submodules and (c) how the actual
implementation looks like, such as where they are configured
and (d) what the best practices are.
To do so, move the conceptual parts of the 'git-submodule'
man page to a new man page gitsubmodules(7). This new page
is just like gitmodules(5), gitattributes(5), gitcredentials(7),
gitnamespaces(7), gittutorial(7), which introduce a concept
rather than explaining a specific command.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since 3ccd681c2a (Merge branch 'sb/submodule-rm-absorb', 2017-01-18)
git-rm tries to absorb any submodules git dir before deleting the
submodule. Correct the documentation to say so.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The "Submodules" section of the "git rm" documentation mentions what will
happen when a submodule with a gitfile gets removed with newer git. But it
doesn't talk about what happens when the user changes between commits
before and after the removal, which does not remove the submodule from the
work tree like using the rm command did the first time.
Explain what happens and what the user has to do manually to fix that in
the new BUGS section. Also document this behavior in a new test.
Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Currently using "git rm" on a submodule removes the submodule's work tree
from that of the superproject and the gitlink from the index. But the
submodule's section in .gitmodules is left untouched, which is a leftover
of the now removed submodule and might irritate users (as opposed to the
setting in .git/config, this must stay as a reminder that the user showed
interest in this submodule so it will be repopulated later when an older
commit is checked out).
Let "git rm" help the user by not only removing the submodule from the
work tree but by also removing the "submodule.<submodule name>" section
from the .gitmodules file and stage both. This doesn't happen when the
"--cached" option is used, as it would modify the work tree. This also
silently does nothing when no .gitmodules file is found and only issues a
warning when it doesn't have a section for this submodule. This is because
the user might just use plain gitlinks without the .gitmodules file or has
already removed the section by hand before issuing the "git rm" command
(in which case the warning reminds him that rm would have done that for
him). Only when .gitmodules is found and contains merge conflicts the rm
command will fail and tell the user to resolve the conflict before trying
again.
Also extend the man page to inform the user about this new feature. While
at it promote the submodule sub-section to a chapter as it made not much
sense under "REMOVING FILES THAT HAVE DISAPPEARED FROM THE FILESYSTEM".
In t7610 three uses of "git rm submod" had to be replaced with "git rm
--cached submod" because that test expects .gitmodules and the work tree
to stay untouched. Also in t7400 the tests for the remaining settings in
the .gitmodules file had to be changed to assert that these settings are
missing.
Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
There was no Porcelain way to say "I no longer am interested in
this submodule", once you express your interest in a submodule with
"submodule init". "submodule deinit" is the way to do so.
* jl/submodule-deinit:
submodule: add 'deinit' command
With "git submodule init" the user is able to tell git he cares about one
or more submodules and wants to have it populated on the next call to "git
submodule update". But currently there is no easy way he could tell git he
does not care about a submodule anymore and wants to get rid of his local
work tree (except he knows a lot about submodule internals and removes the
"submodule.$name.url" setting from .git/config together with the work tree
himself).
Help those users by providing a 'deinit' command. This removes the
whole submodule.<name> section from .git/config (either for the given
submodule(s) or for all those which have been initialized if '.' is used)
together with their work tree. Fail if the current work tree contains
modifications (unless forced), but don't complain when either the work
tree is already removed or no settings are found in .git/config.
Add tests and link the man pages of "git submodule deinit" and "git rm"
to assist the user in deciding whether removing or unregistering the
submodule is the right thing to do for him. Also add the deinit subcommand
to the completion list.
Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
293ab15e ("submodule: teach rm to remove submodules unless they
contain a git directory", 2012-09-26) inserted the "Submodules"
section between a sentence describing a command and the command. Move
the "Submodules" section further down.
Noticed-by: Horst H. von Brand
Signed-off-by: Matt Kraai <kraai@ftbfs.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Currently using "git rm" on a submodule - populated or not - fails with
this error:
fatal: git rm: '<submodule path>': Is a directory
This made sense in the past as there was no way to remove a submodule
without possibly removing unpushed parts of the submodule's history
contained in its .git directory too, so erroring out here protected the
user from possible loss of data.
But submodules cloned with a recent git version do not contain the .git
directory anymore, they use a gitfile to point to their git directory
which is safely stored inside the superproject's .git directory. The work
tree of these submodules can safely be removed without losing history, so
let's teach git to do so.
Using rm on an unpopulated submodule now removes the empty directory from
the work tree and the gitlink from the index. If the submodule's directory
is missing from the work tree, it will still be removed from the index.
Using rm on a populated submodule using a gitfile will apply the usual
checks for work tree modification adapted to submodules (unless forced).
For a submodule that means that the HEAD is the same as recorded in the
index, no tracked files are modified and no untracked files that aren't
ignored are present in the submodules work tree (ignored files are deemed
expendable and won't stop a submodule's work tree from being removed).
That logic has to be applied in all nested submodules too.
Using rm on a submodule which has its .git directory inside the work trees
top level directory will just error out like it did before to protect the
repository, even when forced. In the future git could either provide a
message informing the user to convert the submodule to use a gitfile or
even attempt to do the conversion itself, but that is not part of this
change.
Signed-off-by: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In asciidoc 7, backticks like `foo` produced a typographic
effect, but did not otherwise affect the syntax. In asciidoc
8, backticks introduce an "inline literal" inside which markup
is not interpreted. To keep compatibility with existing
documents, asciidoc 8 has a "no-inline-literal" attribute to
keep the old behavior. We enabled this so that the
documentation could be built on either version.
It has been several years now, and asciidoc 7 is no longer
in wide use. We can now decide whether or not we want
inline literals on their own merits, which are:
1. The source is much easier to read when the literal
contains punctuation. You can use `master~1` instead
of `master{tilde}1`.
2. They are less error-prone. Because of point (1), we
tend to make mistakes and forget the extra layer of
quoting.
This patch removes the no-inline-literal attribute from the
Makefile and converts every use of backticks in the
documentation to an inline literal (they must be cleaned up,
or the example above would literally show "{tilde}" in the
output).
Problematic sites were found by grepping for '`.*[{\\]' and
examined and fixed manually. The results were then verified
by comparing the output of "html2text" on the set of
generated html pages. Doing so revealed that in addition to
making the source more readable, this patch fixes several
formatting bugs:
- HTML rendering used the ellipsis character instead of
literal "..." in code examples (like "git log A...B")
- some code examples used the right-arrow character
instead of '->' because they failed to quote
- api-config.txt did not quote tilde, and the resulting
HTML contained a bogus snippet like:
<tt><sub></tt> foo <tt></sub>bar</tt>
which caused some parsers to choke and omit whole
sections of the page.
- git-commit.txt confused ``foo`` (backticks inside a
literal) with ``foo'' (matched double-quotes)
- mentions of `A U Thor <author@example.com>` used to
erroneously auto-generate a mailto footnote for
author@example.com
- the description of --word-diff=plain incorrectly showed
the output as "[-removed-] and {added}", not "{+added+}".
- using "prime" notation like:
commit `C` and its replacement `C'`
confused asciidoc into thinking that everything between
the first backtick and the final apostrophe were meant
to be inside matched quotes
- asciidoc got confused by the escaping of some of our
asterisks. In particular,
`credential.\*` and `credential.<url>.\*`
properly escaped the asterisk in the first case, but
literally passed through the backslash in the second
case.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Many examples of git command invocation are given in asciidoc listing
blocks, which makes them monospaced and avoids further interpretation of
special characters. Some manpages make a list of examples, like:
git foo::
Run git foo.
git foo -q::
Use the "-q" option.
to quickly show many variants. However, they can sometimes be hard to
read, because they are shown in a proportional-width font (so, for
example, seeing the difference between "-- foo" and "--foo" can be
difficult).
This patch puts all such examples into backticks, which gives the
equivalent formatting to a listing block (i.e., monospaced and without
character interpretation).
As a bonus, this also fixes an example in the git-push manpage, in which
"git push origin :::" was accidentally considered a newly-indented list,
and not a list item with "git push origin :" in it.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The SYNOPSIS sections of most commands that span several lines already
use [verse] to retain line breaks. Most commands that don't span
several lines seem not to use [verse]. In the HTML output, [verse]
does not only preserve line breaks, but also makes the section
indented, which causes a slight inconsistency between commands that
use [verse] and those that don't. Use [verse] in all SYNOPSIS sections
for consistency.
Also remove the blank lines from git-fetch.txt and git-rebase.txt to
align with the other man pages. In the case of git-rebase.txt, which
already uses [verse], the blank line makes the [verse] not apply to
the last line, so removing the blank line also makes the formatting
within the document more consistent.
While at it, add single quotes to 'git cvsimport' for consistency with
other commands.
Signed-off-by: Martin von Zweigbergk <martin.von.zweigbergk@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The point of these sections is generally to:
1. Give credit where it is due.
2. Give the reader an idea of where to ask questions or
file bug reports.
But they don't do a good job of either case. For (1), they
are out of date and incomplete. A much more accurate answer
can be gotten through shortlog or blame. For (2), the
correct contact point is generally git@vger, and even if you
wanted to cc the contact point, the out-of-date and
incomplete fields mean you're likely sending to somebody
useless.
So let's drop the fields entirely from all manpages except
git(1) itself. We already point people to the mailing list
for bug reports there, and we can update the Authors section
to give credit to the major contributors and point to
shortlog and blame for more information.
Each page has a "This is part of git" footer, so people can
follow that to the main git manpage.
Literal " produces typographically incorrect quotations, but "works" in
most circumstances. In the subheadings of git-rm.txt, it "works" for the
html backend but not for the docbook conversion to nroff: double "" and
spurious double spaces appear in the output.
Replace "incorrect" quotations by ``correct'' ones, and fix other
"quotations" which are really `code fragments`.
This should make git-rm.txt "-clean.
Reported-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Helped-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Intended output:
git rm Documentation/\*.txt
Removes all *.txt files from the index that are under
the Documentation directory and any of its
subdirectories.
Note that the asterisk * is quoted from the shell in
this example; this lets git, and not the shell, expand
the pathnames of files and subdirectories under the
Documentation/ directory.
Without this change, there are too many backslashes output.
Tested with asciidoc 8.5.2.
Reported-by: Frédéric Brière <fbriere@fbriere.net>
Cc: Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The current output (with Asciidoc 8.5.2) seems a bit broken:
given two directories ‘d` and d2, there is a difference
between using git rm 'd*’ and ‘git rm 'd/\*\’`, as the
former will also remove all of directory d2.
In other words, the markup parses as
given two directories << d` and _d2_, there is a difference
between using _git rm 'd* >>_ and << git rm 'd/\*\ >> `.
I suspect there is an asciidoc bug involved (why is ' a candidate
closing-quote mark when it is preceded by a backslash?) but with
all the meanings of ` and ' involved I do not want to track it
down. Better to use unambiguous {asterisk} and {apostrophe}
entities.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Newcomers to git that want to remove from the index only the
files that have disappeared from the working tree will probably
look for a way to do that in the documentation for 'git rm'.
Therefore, describe how that can be done (even though it involves
other commands than 'git rm'). Based on a suggestion by Junio,
but re-arranged and rewritten to better fit into the style of
command reference.
While at it, change a single occurrence of "work tree" to "working
tree" for consistency.
Signed-off-by: Björn Gustavsson <bgustavsson@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Consistently back-quote commands, options and file names.
Signed-off-by: Björn Gustavsson <bgustavsson@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This adds a --force flag to git-rm, making it somewhat easier for
subversion people to switch.
Signed-off-by: Pieter de Bie <pdebie@ai.rug.nl>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The names of git commands are not meant to be entered at the
commandline; they are just names. So we render them in italics,
as is usual for command names in manpages.
Using
doit () {
perl -e 'for (<>) { s/\`(git-[^\`.]*)\`/'\''\1'\''/g; print }'
}
for i in git*.txt config.txt diff*.txt blame*.txt fetch*.txt i18n.txt \
merge*.txt pretty*.txt pull*.txt rev*.txt urls*.txt
do
doit <"$i" >"$i+" && mv "$i+" "$i"
done
git diff
.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@uchicago.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Following what appears to be the predominant style, format
names of commands and commandlines both as `teletype text`.
While we're at it, add articles ("a" and "the") in some
places, italicize the name of the command in the manual page
synopsis line, and add a comma or two where it seems appropriate.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@uchicago.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since the git-* commands are not installed in $(bindir), using
"git-command <parameters>" in examples in the documentation is
not a good idea. On the other hand, it is nice to be able to
refer to each command using one hyphenated word. (There is no
escaping it, anyway: man page names cannot have spaces in them.)
This patch retains the dash in naming an operation, command,
program, process, or action. Complete command lines that can
be entered at a shell (i.e., without options omitted) are
made to use the dashless form.
The changes consist only of replacing some spaces with hyphens
and vice versa. After a "s/ /-/g", the unpatched and patched
versions are identical.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@uchicago.edu>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The OPTIONS section of a documentation file contains a list
of the options a git command accepts.
Currently there are several variants to describe the case that
different options (almost) do the same in the OPTIONS section.
Some are:
-f, --foo::
-f|--foo::
-f | --foo::
But AsciiDoc has the special form:
-f::
--foo::
This patch applies this form to the documentation of the whole git suite,
and removes useless em-dash prevention, so \--foo becomes --foo.
Signed-off-by: Stephan Beyer <s-beyer@gmx.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
As the "git" man page describes the "git" command at the end-user
level, it seems better to move it to man section 1.
Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Do some verb-noun agreement changes.
Clarify some file globbing cases.
Fixed a wrong statement in an example.
Signed-off-by: Jon Loeliger <jdl@jdl.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Between AsciiDoc 8.2.2 and 8.2.3, the following change was made to the stock
Asciidoc configuration:
@@ -149,7 +153,10 @@
# Inline macros.
# Backslash prefix required for escape processing.
# (?s) re flag for line spanning.
-(?su)[\\]?(?P<name>\w(\w|-)*?):(?P<target>\S*?)(\[(?P<attrlist>.*?)\])=
+
+# Explicit so they can be nested.
+(?su)[\\]?(?P<name>(http|https|ftp|file|mailto|callto|image|link)):(?P<target>\S*?)(\[(?P<attrlist>.*?)\])=
+
# Anchor: [[[id]]]. Bibliographic anchor.
(?su)[\\]?\[\[\[(?P<attrlist>[\w][\w-]*?)\]\]\]=anchor3
# Anchor: [[id,xreflabel]]
This default regex now matches explicit values, and unfortunately in this
case gitlink was being matched by just 'link', causing the wrong inline
macro template to be applied. By renaming the macro, we can avoid being
matched by the wrong regex.
Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dpmcgee@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In the previous behavior, "git-rm --cached" (without -f) had the same
restriction as "git-rm". This forced the user to use the -f flag in
situations which weren't actually dangerous, like:
$ git add foo # oops, I didn't want this
$ git rm --cached foo # back to initial situation
Previously, the index had to match the file *and* the HEAD. With
--cached, the index must now match the file *or* the HEAD. The behavior
without --cached is unchanged, but provides better error messages.
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This uses "git-apply --whitespace=strip" to fix whitespace errors that have
crept in to our source files over time. There are a few files that need
to have trailing whitespaces (most notably, test vectors). The results
still passes the test, and build result in Documentation/ area is unchanged.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
A bare "--" doesn't show up in man or html pages correctly
as two individual dashes unless backslashed as \--
in the asciidoc source. Note, no backslash is needed
inside a literal block.
Signed-off-by: Sean Estabrooks <seanlkml@sympatico.ca>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Pair up git-add and git-rm by adding a 'see also' section that
references the opposite command to each of their documentation files.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
This adds a git-rm command which provides convenience similar to
git-add, (and a bit more since it takes care of the rm as well if
given -f).
Like git-add, git-rm expands the given path names through
git-ls-files. This means it only acts on files listed in the
index. And it does act recursively on directories by default, (no -r
needed as in the case of rm itself). When it recurses, it does not
remove empty directories that are left behind.
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
