Re: [PATCH] Documentation/fetch-options: emit recurse-submodules, jobs unconditionally

From: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Date: Sep 26, 2016, 21:14 UTC
Message-ID: <CAGZ79kZmy=sx5Awh4W5gq=sW6E7HTRVOiZak834brftENZSyJw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq37kmqt4a.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:
>
>> After a bit more research, I think 8f0700dd33f (fetch/pull: Add the
>> 'on-demand' value to the --recurse-submodules option) is the culprit,
>> where this patch should have been squashed into, as that made the
>> both locations word for word equal.
>
> Hmph, my digging points to elsewhere.  7811d960 ("pull: Document the
> "--[no-]recurse-submodules" options", 2011-02-07)

That commit seems like it want to intentionally keep it different for fetch and pull (otherwise the fetch-options.txt would have been reworded there).

Rereading the actual option descriptions, I realize they are different. (Initially I used a diff tool to see if there is aminor difference, and I was surprised they were word for word identical; It must have been a mistake on copying one of the option texts)

The git-pull part actually conveys pull specific information, so let's drop this patch entirely.

Show 11 quoted lines

> which is older
> than 8f0700dd ("fetch/pull: Add the 'on-demand' value to the
> --recurse-submodules option", 2011-03-06) seems to be the real
> change that pulled the description of recurse-submodules made in
> fetch-options into "show this only when we are not describing pull".
>
> Unfortunately it is not clear why we actively wanted to be sketchier
> when showing "git help fetch"; otherwise the change would have been
> made to the existing description there without adding a new entry to
> "git-pull.txt".
>