From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD6451F404 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2018 21:25:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728353AbeIGCCg (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Sep 2018 22:02:36 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f68.google.com ([209.85.208.68]:42592 "EHLO mail-ed1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727640AbeIGCCg (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Sep 2018 22:02:36 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f68.google.com with SMTP id l5so10029189edw.9 for ; Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:25:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=6I4uhoCAmQv2XquctP4ZzniNPD3VmBiQ9+o9kf6y07M=; b=b5M1lP5EUSOL60PLyqAaLTMegwIwYANZAuHXAti17AmdiH1r+4+c+w5tEcYDL24zWu hiij5kAUvjb5wogf55sBHOSYU/gB4c2LhnejnlvDnDm2+pnbyaxAOa5ph2crwlMtJJL+ eUxiuj+Um0NXI9z8xfernXdQ84iOBCQ/05U67Hay76DLIwB54zjIzbOkrgENO1ev1zLU 0JkQJXmGL5jv6wuHKhSTY725sVcRtVkrLwKaOtWYd6LeegCvkqSH1DPOCel4K+r9GzaJ to28NXRHWQd73TpxDZu+P2gp0kFxSWJf1V7fYZfRoSpddp69dmwLlG287et5wTUUhNyY D4Sw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=6I4uhoCAmQv2XquctP4ZzniNPD3VmBiQ9+o9kf6y07M=; b=P+Mit/rKyxAM/LOxX/1udSb52z7Q1pccg+lxaAtUZCiMHLt8zvzHgFRaFOVsXbGdJw rR5gEAGk7ijFa4Y/KhBmkUewdVdYY1ia9cxlg6fRd87e+BG963dCyxfRrzRzwWAjvFVd Gp+W3/27ehdgUAVWDWSqN2vAaz7SVrjFsA6ZA8keVRh1M7HhamXbF+GYxivHThmtZRn1 J/gLI8xJfa9Y1bbyjqZylFxUyWd6uF3bNyIAGAcq0HId95KX/4q9v6mtcJS+0Ieqe+CK cO99IcRUssDsZj++lxP+EciXxGKH+D070+J5PfH6yLu9R5JXwB32Klvxy8w0jPsl/qfp Rm6w== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51CWA9NDRHwHtDWWBqXyjKnAch+BoNGAwuXUDGOrT/5nhnVIoPbU 52s61xWiAN2yV2hFe6QHOO2W1EqRp3wwXhK7sB4zBnOU X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdbzL956p4zvhezVuom7o+A9n+VzUnKp/bOxqirauA0Pl+FhxWBoL7bQ7CUNhA83bijtKgCCiIefXvAX8X/ebpM= X-Received: by 2002:a50:b410:: with SMTP id b16-v6mr5759797edh.190.1536269112422; Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:25:12 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180905225828.17782-1-sbeller@google.com> <20180905231258.GD120842@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> In-Reply-To: From: Stefan Beller Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 14:25:01 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] diff: allow --recurse-submodules as an synonym for --submodule To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jonathan Nieder , git Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 2:12 PM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Jonathan Nieder writes: > > > It seems like various commands are gaining --recurse-submodules options > > taking different kinds of arguments: > > > > - clone takes --recurse-submodules= > > - fetch takes --recurse-submodules= > > - after this patch, diff takes --recurse-submodules= > > > > Is there a unifying principle? Can Documentation/gitsubmodules.txt > > say a word or two about what kind of argument values the user should > > expect to be accepted by these options? > > I am not sure if the above is rhetorical. The only thing such a > document can say about status-quo is that the user cannot make an > educated guess, as there is no consistency. Some take an option to > clarify which subset of submodules to act on, others take an option > to specify what variant of operation to be made on the submodules. > > In the ideal world, the users ought to be able to give these two > independently, i.e. "fetch" should be able to say "only fetch these > submodules" with pathspec while "run the fetch in all of these > submodules specified (with the pathspec) as necessary" with > "on-demand" mode, for example. > > It may mean that it is too early to add "diff --recurse-submodules" > as a synonym for "diff --submodule", before what we can do to > improve the situation for commands that already take that > "--recurse-submodules" option. Good point. So let's retreat that patch for now? Stefan