From: Junio C Hamano Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 18:58:56 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add an option to git-ls-tree to display also the size of object Message-ID: <7vy7jpj4lr.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> In-Reply-To: <11792246701367-git-send-email-jnareb@gmail.com> Jakub Narebski writes: > Add -l/--long/--size option to git-ls-tree command, which displays > object size of an entry after object id (left-justified with minimum > width of 7 characters). Not a NAK at all (but not an ACK either yet), but just asking questions on some design considerations. * Do these options do different things? If not, why have more than one (or two, --long and its shorthand -l)? * Why pad to 7 places? Do we have a similar padding elsewhere? Will this ever used by non-scripts? How does this padding affect parsers other than Perl that read this information? * Does it make sense to show size information when giving a tree entry? I realize not having it in the output would make the job of the script reading the output a bit harder, but if this output is meant also for human consumption I think it would not be so interesting and raise a confusion factor. Also I suspect that having to show the size of a tree object, expressed in terms of the canonical representation, might force packv4 aware ls-tree to convert its traversal efficient representation to the canonical one only to get its size.