I am interested in learning how a course in geometry is employed today at undergraduate colleges/universities in the U.S. On the one hand, such a course seems to serve as an optional (rarely required) upper-level course of variable content for mathematics majors. But on the other hand, often future high-school teachers need to see Hilbert-style1 planar geometry proofs. So for them, the emphasis on proofs and rigor is essential. Whereas for the upper-level math majors, the course could be differential geometry, algebraic geometry, discrete geometry, etc., according to the instructor's inclinations.
I'd be interested to learn how this tension (if I've accurately captured it) is currently resolved, and what might serve as the content of a college geometry course. Contrasts beyond the U.S. are welcome.
1 Gries D., Schneider F.B. (1993) "Hilbert-style Proofs." In: A Logical Approach to Discrete Math. Texts and Monographs in Computer Science. Springer, New York, NY. DOI link.
PS. I wanted to cite these articles by Joseph Malkevitch (@JosephMalkevitch), advocating for discrete geometry, but I am not finding public links. (Later) Author provided a link.
Malkevitch, Joseph. "The 'New Math' and Claims Discrete Mathematics is the New 'New Math'." Mathematics in School 40, no. 2 (2011): 8-10.
Malkevitch, Joseph. "Discrete Mathematics and Public Perceptions of Mathematics." Discrete Mathematics in the Schools 36 (1992). author's PDF download.
Added 21Sep2020: Thanks to Joe Malkevitch, just saw this recommendation from CUPM (MAA Committee on the Undergraduate Program in Mathematics) on Geometry: "the curricular needs in geometry of future high school mathematics teachers are best satisfied within geometry courses for mathematics majors, not by a separate Geometry for Teachers course."