Stefan Beller wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>> Is it important to avoid clutter by showing the submodule only once?
>> What would you think of showing whatever subset of those three
>> statuses apply to a given submodule as separate lines instead, to
>> match the information that long-form "git
>
> Is it important to avoid clutter by showing the submodule only once?
> What would you think of showing whatever subset of those three
> statuses apply to a given submodule as separate lines instead, to
> match the information that long-form "git status" shows?
I considered it, but it would bre
Hi,
Yay, I like the change this makes. So I'll nitpick in the hope that
that makes the patch more likely to stick.
Stefan Beller wrote:
> While we already have a porcelain2 layer for git-status, that is accurate
> for submodules, users still like the way they are are used to of
> 'status -s'.
While we already have a porcelain2 layer for git-status, that is accurate
for submodules, users still like the way they are are used to of
'status -s'.
As a submodule has more state than a file potentially, we need more letters
indicating these states, we'll go with lower 'm' and single '?' for no
4 matches
Mail list logo
