Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] submodule: don't print status output with ignore=all

From: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Date: Sep 6, 2013, 00:19 UTC
Message-ID: <20130906001946.GC5359@vauxhall.crustytoothpaste.net>
In-Reply-To: <vpqioyf231e.fsf@anie.imag.fr>

On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 08:30:53AM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:

Show 20 quoted lines

> Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> writes:
> 
> > Am 04.09.2013 08:31, schrieb Matthieu Moy:
> >> "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> 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 submodule summary", as that
> > never honored the submodule.*.ignore nor the diff.ignoreSubmodules
> > setting (and I don't think it ever should).
> 
> I don't get it. If the goal is to keep the old behavior, then "git
> status" shouldn't be changed either. Fixing bugs needs to change the
> behavior.
> 
> IOW, why was it a bug that "git status" showed ignored submodules and
> not a bug that "git submodule summary" did the same?

I looked at the tests, and the tests expected git status to respect the ignore settings, but there were no tests that expected git submodule summary to work this way. Perhaps this is a failure in the tests. I got feedback that git submodule summary should *not* change, and nothing until now to contradict that.

If the decision is that this should change both, then fine, I'll reroll. But it's not reasonable to keep going back and forth: we should make a decision and stick to it.

-- 
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
+1 832 623 2791 | http://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187