From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Sixt Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] builtin-status submodule summary Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:22:16 +0100 Message-ID: <47DAA638.6060108@viscovery.net> References: <1205508521-7407-1-git-send-email-pkufranky@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: gitster@pobox.com, git@vger.kernel.org To: Ping Yin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Mar 14 17:23:02 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JaCgP-0008AX-Jr for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:23:02 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753688AbYCNQWW (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:22:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753880AbYCNQWW (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:22:22 -0400 Received: from lilzmailso01.liwest.at ([212.33.55.23]:3101 "EHLO lilzmailso01.liwest.at" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753548AbYCNQWV (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:22:21 -0400 Received: from cm56-163-160.liwest.at ([86.56.163.160] helo=linz.eudaptics.com) by lilzmailso01.liwest.at with esmtpa (Exim 4.66) (envelope-from ) id 1JaCex-0005I9-Le; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:21:31 +0100 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (J6T.linz.viscovery [192.168.1.42]) by linz.eudaptics.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE3E84E4; Fri, 14 Mar 2008 17:22:16 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (Windows/20070728) In-Reply-To: <1205508521-7407-1-git-send-email-pkufranky@gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: 1.7 (+) X-Spam-Report: ALL_TRUSTED=-1.8, BAYES_99=3.5 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Ping Yin schrieb: > IMO, git submodule summary is not so useful for me if it's not > integrated into git-status. In fact i never use "git submodule > summary" directly. git-status with submodule summary support is very > useful to help user figure out what is going on in a more global level > when cooking the commit message. > > So i think this series should go along with the submodule summary series. I think so, too. The changes and defaults in wt-status.c are trivial enough that they don't penalize traditional git-status users. > The v2 series has following commits adding a new commit for documentation > > 1 git-submodule summary: --for-status option > 2 builtin-status: submodule summary support > 3 builtin-status: configurable submodule summary size > 4 buitin-status: Add tests for submodule summary > 5 git-status: Mention status.submodulesummary config in the documentation I'd actually squash 2, 3, and 5. You still have the statement before a declaration in 3/5. > + if (! wt_status_submodule_summary) return; And here the important part (IMO) is actually that 'return' should go on a line of its own. -- Hannes