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
titles their changes 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.