On 8/4/2022 2:27 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 04 2022, Victoria Dye via GitGitGadget wrote: > >> From: Victoria Dye <vdye@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Create a 'git diagnose' builtin to generate a standalone zip archive of >> repository diagnostics. > > It's good to have this as a built-in separate from "git bugreport", > but... > >> +git-diagnose - Generate a zip archive of diagnostic information > > ...I'd really prefer for this not to squat on such a common name we > might regret having reserved later for such very specific > functionality. I'd think e.g. these would be better: > > git mk-diagnostics-zip > > Or maybe: > > git archive-interesting-for-report These are not realistic replacements. > If I had to guess what a "git diagnose" did, I'd probably think: > > * It analyzes your config, and suggests redundancies/alternatives > * It does some perf tests / heuritics, and e.g. suggests you turn on > the commit-graph writing. These sound like great options to add in the future, such as: --perf-test: Run performance tests on your repository using different Git config options and recommend certain settings. (This --perf-test option would be a great way to get wider adoption of parallel checkout, since its optimal settings are so machine dependent.) The thing is, even if we did these other things, it would result in some kind of document that summarizes the repository shape and features. That kind of data is exactly what this version of 'git diagnose' does. For now, it leaves the human reader responsible for making decisions based on those documents, but they have been incredibly helpful when we are _diagnosing_ issues users are having with their repositories. Thanks, -Stolee
