Re: [PATCH 0/3] recursive support for ls-files

> On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 05:13:31PM -0700, Brandon Williams wrote:
> 
> > After looking at the feedback I rerolled a few things, in particular the
> > --submodule_prefix option that existed to give a submodule context about where
> > it had been invoked from.  People didn't seem to like the idea of exposing this
> > to the users (yet anyways) so I removed it as an option and instead have it
> > being passed to a child process via an environment variable
> > GIT_INTERNAL_SUBMODULE_PREFIX.  This way we don't have to support anything to
> > external users at the moment.
> 
> I think we can still have it as a command-line argument and declare it
> internal. It's not like environment variables cannot also be set by our
> callers. :)
> 
> I don't mind it as an environment variable, though. In some ways it
> makes things easier. I just think "internal versus external" and the
> exact implementation are orthogonal.
> 

> > Also fixed a bug (and added a test) for the -z options as pointed out by Jeff
> > King.
> 
> Hmm. It is broken after patch 2, and then fixed in patch 3. Usually we'd
> try not to have a broken state in the history. It's less important in
> this case, because the breakage is not a regression
> (--recurse-submodules is a new feature, so you could consider it "not
> working" until the 3rd patch). But I think it's still a good rule to
> follow, because it makes the commits easier to review, look at later,
> etc.
> 
> For that matter, I do not understand why options like "-s" get enabled
> in patch 3. I do not mind them starting as disabled in patch 2, but it
> seems like "pass along some known-safe options" should be its own patch
> somewhere between patches 2 and 3.

> There are some other options that are ignored (neither disabled nor
> passed along to children). Most of them are related to exclusions, which
> I _think_ are safe to ignore (they do not do anything interesting unless
> you specify "-o", which is explicitly disabled). I'm not sure about
> --with-tree, though (or what it would even mean in the context of
> recursing).