Re: [RFC] On watchman support

> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@web.de> wrote:
>> From a Git user perspective it could be good to have something like this:
>>
>> a) git status -u
>> b) git status -uno
>> c) git status -umtime
>> d) git status -uwatchman
>>
>> We know that a) and b) already exist.
>> c) Can be convenient to have, in order to do benchmarking and testing.
>>   When the UNTR extension is not found, Git can give an error,
>>   saying something like this:
>>   No mtime information found, use "git update-index --untracked-cache"
>> d) does not yet exist
>>
>> Of course we may want to configure the default for "git status" in a default variable,
>> like status.findUntrackedFiles, which can be empty "", "mtime" or "watchman",
>> and we may add other backends later.
> While "git status" is in the spotlight, these optimizations have wider
> impact. Faster index read/refresh/write helps the majority of
> commands. Faster untracked listing hits git-status, git-add,
> git-commit -A... This is why I go with environment variable for
> temporarily disabling something, or we'll need many config and command
> line options, one per command.
>
>> A short test showed that watchman compiles under Mac OS.
>> The patch did not compile out of the box (both Git and watchman declare
>> there own version of usage(), some C99 complaints from the compiler in watchman,
>> nothing that can not be fixed easily)
> Yeah it's not perfect. It's mainly to show speeding up refresh with
> watchman could be done easily and with low impact
>
>> I will test the mtime patch under networked file systems the next weeks.