Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes:

> Thanks, will queue with a minimum fix.

So here are two squashable patches, one is the "minimum" one, the
other is a bit more invasive one to use "a pointer to an optional
setting is set to NULL" convention.  I am undecided, and I'll stay
to be without further comments from others, on the latter one.

I understand that many internal changes in your work environment are
titled like "DOing X", but our convention around here is to label
them "DO X", as if you are giving an order to somebody else, either
telling the codebase "to be like so", or telling the patch-monkey
maintainer "to make it so".  So I'd retitle it

        ls-files: optionally recurse into submodules

or something like that.  It is an added advantage of being a lot
more descriptive than "adding support", which does not say what kind
of support it is adding.

Reply via email to