Shourya Shukla <shouryashukla.oo@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 21/05 12:50, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> OK, so "we accept -q for uniformity across subcommands, but there is >> nothing to make less verbose in this subcommand" is the answer to my >> question. >> >> That cannot be read from "... is currently not used"; especially >> with "currently", I expect that most readers would expect we would >> start using it in the (near) future, and some other readers would >> guess that something used to be talkative and we squelched it using >> the option but there no longer is such need because that something >> is now quiet by default and there is no option to make it talkative. > > What do you think should be the most apt comment here? "we accept -q for uniformity across subcommands, but there is nothing to make less verbose in this subcommand", perhaps? > Also, the rest of the code is fine right? I didn't spot anything bad worth pointing out when I sent the review message, but that does not necessarily mean the code is "fine" ;-) I see you have v4 sent out already, which probably has more improvements based on others' input. Thanks for working on this topic.
