Le 13.05.2020 à 22:35, Junio C Hamano a écrit :
> Guillaume Galeazzi <guillaume.galeazzi@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> I already said I was *not* suggesting a concrete syntax. The more
> important point was to make us realize that we need to think outside
> of "active-only" and make sure we can support other kinds of selection
> criteria for submodules.
Ok get it now. So after looking a bit, another trait that could be
interesting filtering on is remote tracking branch. A v2 with filtering
based on active (or not), populated (or not), and tracked remote branch
is ready on my side. It also include the rename of the struct member
only_active to active_only. Let me know when I can /submit.
> So spelling out "--no-blah" to mean "not with blah" is probably a
> good thing to do (especially if readers do not mind being English
> centric).
>
Great, it make it a bit simpler to code, thanks for the tips.
