Re: [PATCH 3/3] pkt-line: support tracing verbatim pack contents
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Jun 16, 2015, 16:43 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20150616164310.GA18667@peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqvben6214.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 09:39:19AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> As to the documentation, I have a feeling that, unless the reader > and/or the user intimately knows that TRACE_PACK is implemented by > hooking into the same mechanism that TRACE_PACKET needs to, s/he > would not even wonder if TRACE_PACKET needs to be enabled when > asking for TRACE_PACK. Yes, one is a proper substring of the other, > but the similarity between the two stops there. While I do not > think it would hurt very much to mention that they are independent, > I have a slight suspicion that it might make it more likely to get > user confused.
Yes, I was just re-reading the documentation based on Augie's comment, and it seems pretty clear to me. Of course I wrote it, so that is not saying much. Augie, I'd be happy to hear a proposed wording change if you have one.
I do kind of hate the name TRACE_PACK for two reasons:
- it _is_ so close to TRACE_PACKET; maybe TRACE_PACKFILE would be
better - it does not indicate that it is about on-the-wire packs. I.e., it
has nothing to do with "git repack". But I could not think of a good
succinct name to indicate that.-Peff