Re: [PATCH] submodule: use abbreviated sha1 in 'status' output

2012-10-01 Thread Jens Lehmann
Am 01.10.2012 08:42, schrieb Ramkumar Ramachandra: > Jens Lehmann wrote: >> That is just a single user so far indicating your patch /could/ be an >> improvement. I think we need quite some more votes on that before we >> should do a change like this. > > I thought it's a porcelain command like 'gi

Re: [PATCH] submodule: use abbreviated sha1 in 'status' output

2012-09-30 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Jens Lehmann wrote: > I suspect you got the idea for this patch from Marc's recent comment: > [...] Yes, I did. > That is just a single user so far indicating your patch /could/ be an > improvement. I think we need quite some more votes on that before we > should do a change like this. I thought

Re: [PATCH] submodule: use abbreviated sha1 in 'status' output

2012-09-29 Thread Jens Lehmann
Am 29.09.2012 16:45, schrieb Ramkumar Ramachandra: > Jens Lehmann wrote: >> I'm not against the change per se, but do we really want to risk breaking >> scripts which parse the output of "git submodule status" without even >> providing a commit message explaining why we did that? > > Oh, I didn't

Re: [PATCH] submodule: use abbreviated sha1 in 'status' output

2012-09-29 Thread Jens Lehmann
I'm not against the change per se, but do we really want to risk breaking scripts which parse the output of "git submodule status" without even providing a commit message explaining why we did that? Am 29.09.2012 15:43, schrieb Ramkumar Ramachandra: > Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra > --- >

[PATCH] submodule: use abbreviated sha1 in 'status' output

2012-09-29 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Signed-off-by: Ramkumar Ramachandra --- git-submodule.sh | 15 --- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/git-submodule.sh b/git-submodule.sh index 1d61ebd..f8efc52 100755 --- a/git-submodule.sh +++ b/git-submodule.sh @@ -942,27 +942,28 @@ cmd_status()