From: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 20:39:59 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 6/7] submodule: refactor show_submodule_summary with helper function
Message-ID: <CAGZ79kZp+fhB-APx+zSAyYYiLq0pinDZOS1s33a7OjckJOi5=A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+P7+xrNzc-+KBdu20QpEcCJ_udYUUk=qQyDi26YoOyCwrPXiQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 1:24 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 17, 2016 at 5:51 PM, Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com> wrote:
>>> +       if (is_null_sha1(one))
>>> +               message = "(new submodule)";
>>> +       else if (is_null_sha1(two))
>>> +               message = "(submodule deleted)";
>>> +
>>> +       if (add_submodule_odb(path)) {
>>> +               if (!message)
>>> +                       message = "(submodule not initialized)";
>>
>> Before it was  "(not initialized)" for this case, I think we'd rather keep that?
>> Though this code path is only used by the porcelain commands, we'd rather not
>> want to change this in a subtle way in this commit.
>>
>> If we were to change those, we could discuss if we want to go with
>> full sentences
>> all the time:
>>
>>     submodule is new
>>     submodule is deleted
>>     submodule is not initialized
>>
>>
>
> I agree, I'll make a new patch that does this as a cleanup prior to
> this re-work.

I was actually not suggesting to change that. I rather wanted to point out
that if we'd want that we'd rather do it consistently and in a different patch.
Sorry for not being clear.

Thanks,
Stefan

>
> Thanks,
> Jake