Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > (Though wondering for non-submodule users, if they perceive it as > inconsistency as other parts of the code may not follow the rigorous quoting) Do you mean that we may instead want to remove the excessive quoting of branch names and stuff from submodule.c code, because they are newer ones that broke the consistency existed before them (i.e. not quoting)? That certainly is tempting, but I personally find it easier to read a message that marks parts that holds "external data" differently from the message's text, so I think this patch 2/2 goes in the right direction.
