Stefan Beller [off-list ref] writes:
quoted hunk
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <redacted>
---
git-submodule.sh | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/git-submodule.sh b/git-submodule.sh
index 8b0eb9a..578ec48 100755
--- a/git-submodule.sh
+++ b/git-submodule.sh
@@ -684,7 +684,7 @@ cmd_update()
if test "$update_module" = "none"
then
- echo "Skipping submodule '$displaypath'"
+ echo >&2 "Skipping submodule '$displaypath'"
continue
fi
Makes sense, but see 02/12.
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 1:37 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Stefan Beller [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <redacted>
---
git-submodule.sh | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/git-submodule.sh b/git-submodule.sh
index 8b0eb9a..578ec48 100755
--- a/git-submodule.sh
+++ b/git-submodule.sh
@@ -684,7 +684,7 @@ cmd_update()
if test "$update_module" = "none"
then
- echo "Skipping submodule '$displaypath'"
+ echo >&2 "Skipping submodule '$displaypath'"
continue
fi
Makes sense, but see 02/12.
The patch (I can't see a reply there) ?
I split them on purpose. This one uses echo as opposed to say and has
no tests to fail.
So this patch documents, that there are no breaking tests. I can just change it
2/12 tells another story: We codified the behavior in tests and rely on it, so
we need to carefully decide if that's a breaking change.