"Nika Layzell via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > The refresh command is called from git-add--interactive to ensure that git's > view of the worktree is up-to-date. This is necessary for most commands > which use git-add--interactive, as they are interacting with the worktree, > however it's not necessary for git-reset, which exclusively operates on the > index. This patch skips the refresh call when performing a git-reset -p, > which can improve performance on large repositories which have out-of-date, > or no, caches of the current worktree state. > > I chose to use the existing FILTER property of the flavour to make this > decision. A separate REFRESH property could be added instead. Hmph, I wonder why this was sent my way. How does GGG determine whom to send patches to? I, like other reviewers, prefer not to see earlier rounds of patches sent directly to me unless they are about areas that I am mostly responsible for (other patches I'll see them and review them on the copies sent to the mailing list anyway). CC'ing Dscho who has stakes in keeping the scripted "add -i" frozen, while he is rewriting it in C. Thanks. > > Nika Layzell (1): > add--interactive: skip index refresh in reset patch mode > > git-add--interactive.perl | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > base-commit: 5fa0f5238b0cd46cfe7f6fa76c3f526ea98148d9 > Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-475%2Fmystor%2Findex-only-refresh-v1 > Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-475/mystor/index-only-refresh-v1 > Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/475
