Damien Robert <damien.olivier.robert@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > + > +--[no-]recurse-submodules:: > + When the working tree is updated, using --recurse-submodules will > +... > > +--recurse-submodules:: > +--no-recurse-submodules:: > + If `<pathspec>` names a submodule and the restore location includes > +... Hmph, this inconsistency across files is a bit unfortunate. I think (please somebody correct me from sideways) we have been moving towards using the "--[no-]option-name", so we would want to clean up the latter (together with the "--[no-]overlay" entry in the same file, with which the above tries to be consistent) sometime later when the dust settles, iow, not as a part of this series. > + is given, in which case it's working tree will be restored to the > + commit recorded in the superproject, and it's local modifications > + overwritten. If nothing (or `--no-recurse-submodules`) is used, > + the work trees of submodules will not be updated. Just like > + linkgit:git-checkout[1], this will detach `HEAD` of the submodule. > + > --overlay:: > --no-overlay:: > In overlay mode, the command never removes files when
