Le sam. 8 août 2020 à 16:40, Kaartic Sivaraam <kaartic.sivaraam@xxxxxxxxx> a écrit : > > On 06-08-2020 22:10, Shourya Shukla wrote: > > The 'for-status' option is used to compute the summary of submodule(s) > > in a superproject by skipping the ignored submdules i.e., those with > > 'submodule.<name>.ignore' set to 'all' in the '.gitmodules' or > > '.git/config', with the latter taking precedence over the former. The above seems to suggest that a name like --skip-ignored could fit, if we wanted to rename --for-status. > > The option was introduced in d0f64dd44d (git-submodule summary: > > --for-status option, 2008-04-12), refined in 3ba7407b8b (submodule > > summary: ignore --for-status option, 2013-09-06) and finally perfected > > in 927b26f87a (submodule: don't print status output with ignore=all, > > 2013-09-01). But, it was not mentioned in the 'git submodule' > > Documentation. After this we would need to tell why it's a good idea to actually document this option (and perhaps rename it if we are going to do that). It could be a good idea, if it could help users to see a summary without the ignored submodules. So for example a possibly good justification could be that in a repo with many ignored submodules it might be interesting for users to get a summary that contains information only about the non-ignored submodules. An example output of `git submodule summary` both with and without --for-status (or --skip-ignored) in an interesting case (where there are many ignored submodule) could help convince people that it's a possibly useful option, and that it's worth documenting. > > Expose the '--for-status' option accepted by the command 'git submodule > > summary'. > > > > I've had one concern about exposing '--for-status'. As of now, the name > of the option has no relation with the behaviour that we get as a > consequence. So long, the option has been internal and this wasn't a > problem. Now that we're considering to expose it in the docs, usage and > autocomplete, I would say it should be done after renaming it > appropriately given that it's easy to do now than later. As to name > suggestions, I really don't have any. Yeah, I agree that finding a good name and a good use case for the option would surely help. > Also, as to whether exposing this would be useful at all, I really don't > know.
