On 17.11.20 13:05, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
> On 17/11/20 12:13PM, Stefan Haller wrote:
>> On 17.11.20 8:36, Pratyush Yadav wrote:
>>> Hi Stefan,
>>>
>>> On 14/11/20 08:14PM, Stefan Haller wrote:
>>>> On 03.11.20 17:16, Stefan Haller wrote:
>>>>> Do an automatic rescan whenever the git-gui window receives focus. Most other
>>>>> GUI tools do this, and it's very convenient; no more pressing F5 manually.
>>>>>
>>>>> People who don't like this behavior can turn it off in the Options dialog.
>>>>
>>>> Ping - any thoughts? I have been running with this patch for a few weeks
>>>> now, and I already don't want to miss it any more.
>>>
>>> I have been staring at your patch for the last few days with indecision.
>>> I have finally made up my mind. I do not think it is a good idea to hurt
>>> the experience of a significant population of our users without at least
>>> telling them how they can fix it.
>>>
>>> The config option is not very visible at all. Experience has told me
>>> that people don't often go looking around in the options menu to find a
>>> fix for their problem. So we need to do a better job of educating them
>>> why they might be experiencing slowdowns and how they can avoid them.
>>>
>>> Let's take inspiration from git status. When the local branch diverges
>>> from the upstream branch, git status shows you how many commits your
>>> branch is ahead and how many commits behind upstream. This can be an
>>> expensive operation if the divergence point is far behind. In those
>>> cases, git status prints something like:
>>>
>>> It took 30.00 seconds to calculate the branch ahead/behind values.
>>> You can use '--no-ahead-behind' to avoid this.
>>>
>>> This made me aware this option existed and that I can use it to avoid
>>> slowdowns.
>>>
>>> We should do something similar for the auto rescan. Measure how long it
>>> takes to finish the rescan and if it takes longer than X seconds then
>>> tell the user that they can use this option to disable this. If they
>>> don't mind the delay they can keep on using it.
>>>
>>> I am working on a patch to add this. Will send it in a day or two.
>>
>> Sounds good to me. While I personally don't think such a check is
>> necessary in this case, I also have nothing against it if you find it
>> important.
>>
>> It just needs to be possible to disable that check itself, too. I
>> certainly wouldn't want to be bothered by it, even if the rescan should
>> take longer than whatever threshold you decide on. So if you put up a
>> dialog to inform the user, the dialog should ideally have a "Don't show
>> again" option.
>
> That's the plan. It will be a yes/no/cancel prompt. Saying yes or no
> sets auto rescan to on/off and the message won't pop up again. Saying
> cancel does nothing and you will see the popup again on the next long
> rescan.
Interesting. After thinking about this for a while, I'm not convinced
that a Yes/No/Cancel dialog is the best user experience for this, for
the following reasons:
- It isn't obvious whether clicking No will turn auto-rescan off only
for this repo, or globally (unless you provide two different buttons
for this).
- It doesn't teach users how they can turn it back on if they clicked No
too hastily (e.g. because they didn't immediately understand the
difference between No and Cancel).
- It isn't really intuitively obvious what "Cancel" means. What is the
operation that is being cancelled here? The rescan itself has already
happened. (Yes, I know that the operation being cancelled is the
process of deciding whether the option should be turned off, but as I
said, I don't find this intuitive.)
I think it might be a better user experience to have a dialog like this:
The automatic rescan on activating the application has
taken more than X seconds. If this bothers you, you can
turn it off in the Preferences dialog.
[x] Don't show again
[OK]
The only downside is that it's more work to implement, as you can't use
tk_messageBox.
All of this is just my humble opinion; if you decide to stick to your
plan, that's ok with me too.
>>>> Cc:-ing a few people who were involved in the discussion on Pratyush's
>>>> similar patch last summer. [0]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [0] <https://lore.kernel.org/git/20190728151726.9188-1-
>>>> me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Haller <stefan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> git-gui.sh | 5 +++++
>>>>> lib/option.tcl | 1 +
>>>>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/git-gui.sh b/git-gui.sh
>>>>> index 867b8ce..14735a3 100755
>>>>> --- a/git-gui.sh
>>>>> +++ b/git-gui.sh
>>>>> @@ -906,6 +906,7 @@ set font_descs {
>>>>> }
>>>>> set default_config(gui.stageuntracked) ask
>>>>> set default_config(gui.displayuntracked) true
>>>>> +set default_config(gui.autorescan) true
>>>>>
>>>>> ######################################################################
>>>>> ##
>>>>> @@ -4007,6 +4008,10 @@ bind . <Alt-Key-2> {focus_widget $::ui_index}
>>>>> bind . <Alt-Key-3> {focus $::ui_diff}
>>>>> bind . <Alt-Key-4> {focus $::ui_comm}
>>>>>
>>>>> +if {[is_config_true gui.autorescan]} {
>>>>> + bind . <FocusIn> { if {"%W" eq "."} do_rescan }
>>>>> +}
>>>>> +
>>>>> set file_lists_last_clicked($ui_index) {}
>>>>> set file_lists_last_clicked($ui_workdir) {}
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/lib/option.tcl b/lib/option.tcl
>>>>> index e43971b..9e83db7 100644
>>>>> --- a/lib/option.tcl
>>>>> +++ b/lib/option.tcl
>>>>> @@ -145,6 +145,7 @@ proc do_options {} {
>>>>> {b merge.diffstat {mc "Show Diffstat After Merge"}}
>>>>> {t merge.tool {mc "Use Merge Tool"}}
>>>>>
>>>>> + {b gui.autorescan {mc "Auto-Rescan On Activate"}}
>>>>> {b gui.trustmtime {mc "Trust File Modification Timestamps"}}
>>>>> {b gui.pruneduringfetch {mc "Prune Tracking Branches During Fetch"}}
>>>>> {b gui.matchtrackingbranch {mc "Match Tracking Branches"}}
>>>>> --
>>>>> 2.29.2
>>>>>
>>>
>
