Hi, On Sun, Jun 7, 2009 at 6:31 PM, Tay Ray Chuan<rctay89@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Jeff King<peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Fetching %s (got %d packs, %d loose): (%d/%d) >> > Hmm, just wondering, is this is the intended display for "-q" or "-v"? > Or should I do isatty(), like builtin-pack-objects.c does for the > "Writing objects" progress indicator? by the way, I have updated http-progress-indicators based on your suggestions. What I have now is: Fetching %d objects (got %d of %d, %d alt)[, and %s]: 100% (32077585/32077585), 30.59 MiB, done. where 1. %d objects = number of concurrent objects being fetched, usually around 4-5. Since objects are fetched alongside other files like packs and pack indices, I separated this from (4). 2. got %d of %d = a count of loose objects. I haven't done counting of packs yet, but it shouldn't be very hard. 3. %d alt = number of alternate objects. The way I'm counting them now is very inaccurate; I may drop this if it's too complicated to do an accurate count. I added this because some people use forked repos, and they may wonder why after some time, the number of objects fetched doesn't increase. (The time was spent on waiting for the server, only for it to return a 404). 4. [, and %s] = an "optional" field that gets displayed when packs, pack indices, etc. (everything except objects) are being fetched. The byte counts are for this fetch, not the object fetch(es). How about pack file verification? Some pack files are monstrous, and can take some time to verify. Is it desirable to fit in pack file verification into the same "Fetching..." line? Verification is a per-file thing, so it should deserve the same treatment that "Getting pack ..." lines got. -- Cheers, Ray Chuan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html