On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 1:54 PM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote:
> Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes:
>> After a bit more research, I think 8f0700dd33f (fetch/pull: Add the
>> 'on-demand' value to the --recurse-submodules option) is the culprit,
>> where this patch should have been squashed into, as that made the
>> both locations word for word equal.
> Hmph, my digging points to elsewhere.  7811d960 ("pull: Document the
> "--[no-]recurse-submodules" options", 2011-02-07)

That commit seems like it want to intentionally keep it different for
fetch and pull
(otherwise the fetch-options.txt would have been reworded there).

Rereading the actual option descriptions, I realize they are different.
(Initially I used a diff tool to see if there is aminor difference, and I was
surprised they were word for word identical; It must have been a mistake
on copying one of the option texts)

The git-pull part actually conveys pull specific information, so let's drop
this patch entirely.

> which is older
> than 8f0700dd ("fetch/pull: Add the 'on-demand' value to the
> --recurse-submodules option", 2011-03-06) seems to be the real
> change that pulled the description of recurse-submodules made in
> fetch-options into "show this only when we are not describing pull".
> Unfortunately it is not clear why we actively wanted to be sketchier
> when showing "git help fetch"; otherwise the change would have been
> made to the existing description there without adding a new entry to
> "git-pull.txt".

Reply via email to