The original idea was to completely replace git_refs with remotes["git"] by
introducing "forgotten" state, but it turned out to break "fetch && undo"
scenario. There are other ways around, but they also have problems:
* Sets tombstone on forgotten/deleted remote refs, exports remote refs without
comparing to the known refs.
* `jj undo` would need to insert tombstone by diffing old/new views.
* `jj branch forget` would need to preserve the @git branch whereas the other
remote branches would be forgotten.
* Always overwrites remote refs on export.
* `jj git export` without importing would discard remote refs.
So, I decided to not remove git_refs. Apparently, it also improves the undo
behavior. In the new model, `jj git fetch && jj undo && jj git fetch` works
even if git_refs isn't rolled back. So we can unify the default of
`jj undo --what`.
This is essentially a new version, which clarifies multiple statements about
`jj run`. Notably, it cleans up some mistakes which were overlooked or deemed
good enough in the Google Docs version.
This ticks another box in #1869.
Co-Authored-By: arxanas <me@waleedkhan.name>
Co-Authored-By: hooper <hooper@google.com>
Co-Authored-By: martinvonz <martinvonz@google.com>
This doc describes what we need to consider in a submodule storage
solution, some possible solutions and what criteria we should use to
decide on a future direction.
This is still a WIP:
- The solutions are still underdescribed
- The actual evaluation of solutions is missing
Suggestions for the above are welcome :)
This document is meant to be a record of how we think about Git
submodules (and not a _current_ implementation of submodules). We will
fill it out incrementally as we get a clearer idea of what we want
submodules to look like.
As an initial version, I started with (IMO) the least controversial
points:
- We want to support most workflows Git submodules users are accustomed
to.
- A roadmap that allows us to incrementally roll out Git submodule
functionality (instead of having to boil the ocean).
