On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 11:01:02PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > Maybe the "Removing unused objects" should use the common progress > > infrastructure? It could even use the delayed interface, just like when > > checking out files, so no progress at all is displayed when that > > operation completes within a certain delay. And the removal of unused > > objects is usually quick. > > Are you volunteering (I think you know the progress code best)? > Otherwise, I will get to it, but probably not tonight. If I do it that won't be today either. > > But I like the statistics. They might be pretty handy to diagnoze > > performance issues on remote servers for example. > > They are by far the most useful of the three lines I mentioned, but I > just wonder if they are a bit meaningless and cluttery for light users. > We can always cut the others and see how it looks. Frankly, I think effort should be spent on the refs update display at this point. Something that looks like: * refs/heads/origin: fast forward to branch 'master' of git://gi t.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6 old..new: 66ffb04..4fa4d23 [ note that I arbitrarily cut the long line before the 80th column to show the effect within an email ] You usually get long lines that gets wrapped, so that means 3 lines of screen space for one updated branches. Is the "66ffb04..4fa4d23" information really useful? Might someone ever care? Nicolas - 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
