Re: [PATCH 1/3] submodule.c: port is_submodule_modified to use porcelain 2
Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> writes:
Show 19 quoted lines
> Stefan Beller wrote:
>
>> Migrate 'is_submodule_modified' to the new porcelain format of
>> git-status.
>>
>> As the old porcelain only reported ' M' for submodules, no
>> matter what happened inside the submodule (untracked files,
>> changes to tracked files or move of HEAD), the new API
>> properly reports the different scenarios.
> [...]
>> submodule.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------------
>> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
>
> Neat. Is this something that could be covered in tests, or should I
> be patient and rely on patch 3/3 for that?
>
> I think this would be easier to understand if it were two patches: one
> that switched to --porcelain=2 with no change in behavior, and another
> that took advantage of --porcelain=2 to return richer information.
That sounds like a sensible organization.
> As is, I had trouble verifying that this isn't going to break
> anything --- there's not enough local information here and in
> submodule.h to tell what callers may rely on and I didn't audit
> callers.
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>