Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > 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.