Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@xxxxxx> writes:
> Thanks, that looks good to me:
>
> # It took 2.58 seconds to enumerate untracked files.
> # Consider the -u option for a possible speed-up?
>
> But:
> If I follow the advice as is given and use "git status -u", the result is the same.
Yeah, that was taken from
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/215820/focus=218125
to which I said something about "more levels of indirections". This
episode shows that even a user who was very well aware of the issue
did not follow a single level of indirection.
> If I think loud, would it be better to say:
>
> # It took 2.58 seconds to search for untracked files.
> # Consider the -uno option for a possible speed-up?
>
> or
>
> # It took 2.58 seconds to search for untracked files.
> # Consider the -u option for a possible speed-up?
> # Please see git help status
The former actively hurts the users, but the latter would be good,
given that your documentation updates clarifies the trade off.
Or we can be more explicit and say
# It took 2.58 seconds to search for untracked files. 'status -uno'
# may speed it up, but you have to be careful not to forget to add
# new files yourself (see 'git help status').
or something.
--
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