Marc Branchaud <mbranchaud@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 12-09-23 01:36 PM, Jens Lehmann wrote: >> Am 22.09.2012 22:31, schrieb Junio C Hamano: >>> Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>>> diff --git a/git-submodule.sh b/git-submodule.sh >>>> index a7e933e..dfec45d 100755 >>>> --- a/git-submodule.sh >>>> +++ b/git-submodule.sh >>>> @@ -1108,7 +1108,15 @@ do >>>> done >>>> >>>> # No command word defaults to "status" >>>> -test -n "$command" || command=status >>>> +if test -z "$command" >>>> +then >>>> + if test $# = 0 >>>> + then >>>> + command=status >>>> + else >>>> + usage >>>> + fi >>>> +fi >>> >>> I personally feel "no command means this default" is a mistake for >>> "git submodule", even if there is no pathspec or other arguments, >>> but I am not a heavy user of submodules, so others should discuss >>> this. >> >> ... but I'd rather tend to not change that >> behavior which has been there from day one for backward compatibility >> reasons. But if many others see that as an improvement too I won't >> object against changing it the way Ramkumar proposes (but he'd have >> to change the documentation too ;-). >> >> Since diff and status learned to display submodule status information >> (except for a submodule being uninitialized) I almost never use this >> option myself, so I'd be interested to hear what submodule users who >> do use "git submodule [status]" frequently think. > > I also almost never use "git submodule [status]", and I also agree that > git-submodule shouldn't have a default sub-command. OK, I do not think Ramkumar's patch hurts anybody, but dropping the "nothing on the command line defaults to 'status' action" could. So let's queue the patch as-is at least for now and leave the default discussion to a separarte thread if needed. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html