On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 08:30:53AM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:
> Jens Lehmann writes:
>
> > Am 04.09.2013 08:31, schrieb Matthieu Moy:
> >> "brian m. carlson" writes:
> >>
> >>> Tests are included which verify that this change has no effect on git
> >>> submodule
> >>> summary without the --for
Matthieu Moy writes:
> Jens Lehmann writes:
>
>> Fine by me, what would you propose to clarify that? (Though I have the
>> suspicion that the explanation will be three years late ;-)
>
> I have no idea, as I do not understand the reason myself yet. I'm not a
> frequent user of submodules and not
Jens Lehmann writes:
> Am 04.09.2013 08:31, schrieb Matthieu Moy:
>> "brian m. carlson" writes:
>>
>>> Tests are included which verify that this change has no effect on git
>>> submodule
>>> summary without the --for-status option.
>>
>> I still don't understand why this is needed.
>
> To avo
Am 04.09.2013 22:57, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Jens Lehmann writes:
>
>> Am 03.09.2013 21:53, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
>>> Does this update to 2/2 look good to you? Sorry, but I lost track
>>> of the discussion that led to this reroll, hence a ping.
>>
>> v3 fixes the bug Matthieu noticed, I only
Am 04.09.2013 08:31, schrieb Matthieu Moy:
> "brian m. carlson" writes:
>
>> Tests are included which verify that this change has no effect on git
>> submodule
>> summary without the --for-status option.
>
> I still don't understand why this is needed.
To avoid a change in behavior for "git su
Jens Lehmann writes:
> Am 03.09.2013 21:53, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
>> Jens, I see 1/2 is the same as the previous one you already acked.
>
> Yep.
>
>> Does this update to 2/2 look good to you? Sorry, but I lost track
>> of the discussion that led to this reroll, hence a ping.
>
> v3 fixes the b
Am 03.09.2013 21:53, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Jens, I see 1/2 is the same as the previous one you already acked.
Yep.
> Does this update to 2/2 look good to you? Sorry, but I lost track
> of the discussion that led to this reroll, hence a ping.
v3 fixes the bug Matthieu noticed, I only had som
"brian m. carlson" writes:
> Tests are included which verify that this change has no effect on git
> submodule
> summary without the --for-status option.
I still don't understand why this is needed. Why do we want "git status"
and "git submodule summary" to display different information? Wasn't
Am 01.09.2013 22:06, schrieb brian m. carlson:
> git status prints information for submodules, but it should ignore the status
> of
> those which have submodule..ignore set to all. Fix it so that it does
> properly ignore those which have that setting either in .git/config or in
> .gitmodules.
>
Jens, I see 1/2 is the same as the previous one you already acked.
Does this update to 2/2 look good to you? Sorry, but I lost track
of the discussion that led to this reroll, hence a ping.
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to major
10 matches
Mail list logo