From: Jameson Miller Date: Thu, 05 Oct 2017 21:22:02 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] Teach Status options around showing ignored files Message-ID: <21c31e97-a550-1573-52c1-4c21584341bc@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20171005211643.GC88769@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com> On 10/05/2017 05:16 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi, > > jameson.miller81@gmail.com wrote: > >> This patch series is the second part of [1], which was split into 2 >> parts. The first part, added an optimization in the directory listing >> logic to not scan the contents of ignored directories and was merged >> to master with commit 5aaa7fd3. This patch series includes the second >> part to expose additional arguments to the --ignored option on the >> status command. > Thanks. > >> This patch series teaches the status command more options to control >> which ignored files are reported independently of the which untracked > [...] >> Our application (Visual Studio) has a specific set of requirements >> about how it wants untracked / ignored files reported by git status. > [...] >> The reason for controlling these behaviors separately is that there >> can be a significant performance impact to scanning the contents of > [....] >> As a more concrete example, on Windows, Visual Studio creates a bin/ >> and obj/ directory inside of the project where it writes all .obj and > [...] > > I see this information is also in patch 1/6. That's a very good > thing, since that makes performance numbers involved more concrete > about which patch brings them about and it becomes part of permanent > history that way --- thanks. > > But it took me a while to notice, and before then, I was trying to > read through the cover letter to get an overview of which patches I am > supposed to look at. For next time, could the cover letter say > something like "See patches 1 and 2 for more details about the > motivation" instead of repeating the commit message content? That > would save reviewers some time. Will do - thank you for the feedback! > > Thanks, > Jonathan