Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I do not want to taint other folks' eyes with my observations, so I'd > send my impression in a separate message as a response to this > message after waiting for some time. Between the previous and latest of the Johannes's topic, the test output got a lot shorter by discarding the "ok" output and keeping only the failures and skips. Because the readers are mostly interested in seeing failures (they can download the full log if they want to), and this design decision probably makes sense to me. The same "while scrolling, the user has to stare into the gray void for several seconds" is still there and needs a bit of getting used to (I do not know if it is a browser's problem, or something the output can help giving a better user experience---the lines in the folded part may probably not be "counted" correctly or something silly like that). The ones with the topic from Ævar last night, as I've mentioned already, lacked the main part of the logic, and it wouldn't have worked correctly because there was a show-stopper bug in one of the steps in it. With that fixed, the "extra click" I complained last night seems to be gone. I guess the same "discard the test steps that successfully ran" trick would give us the same "shorter" output. I observe the same "staring into the gray void while scrolling" when it comes to the print-test-failures output, just as in the output from Johannes's topic. Common to the both approaches, folding output from each test piece to one line (typically "ok" but sometimes "failed" heading) may be the source of UI responsiveness irritation I have been observing, but I wonder, with the removal of all "ok" pieces, it may make sense not to fold anything and instead give a flat "here are the traces of all failed and skipped tests". In any case, either implementation seems to give us a good improvement over what is in 'master'. Thanks.
