Sangeeta NB <sangunb09@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> I found this change a "noise": > > Oh okay, Again sorry for the misunderstanding. > >> >> strvec_pushl(&cp.args, "status", "--porcelain=2", NULL); >> if (ignore_untracked) >> - strvec_push(&cp.args, "-uno"); >> + strvec_push (&cp.args, "-uno"); >> >> If it were going the other direction, "we fix coding style violation >> while at it" may be a good justification to do so, but this >> particular change (1) is not neeeded for the purpose of this patch, >> and (2) is making the code worse by deviating from the coding >> guideline. Please drop it. >> > This part of the change was introduced because we had a failing test > here[3]. There was some problem it getting both the flags propagated > through ... Are you talking about the new "else" clause added to the "if" statement we see above? I am not saying it is a "noise". But look at what you did to the existing call to strvec_push() to add "-uno" shown above in the patch, i.e. the addition of space before the parenthesis. We cannot justify that change, can we? That's noise as far as I can see.
