Re: [PATCH RESEND] archive: rewrite description for compression level option
- From
Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com>
- Date
- Oct 15, 2021, 03:22 UTC
- Message-ID
- <8e99fbef-32d0-9f19-4e57-1f28108c70cb@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqh7djczxr.fsf@gitster.g>
On 14/10/21 23.51, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 21 quoted lines
> Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@gmail.com> writes: > >> Currently, the description of compression level option (`-<number>` or >> `-#`) only specifies two level (`-0` and `-9`), giving the impression >> that only both levels are accepted, although other level number can be >> specified. Rewrite the description. > > While I find that the updated description is more detailed [*], I am > not sure if the change to the heading is an improvement for readers, > as I do not think of a case where users would choose to use anything > other than to use (1) no compression level option, (2) '-0' for > speed, or (3) '-9' for size, and explicitly singling out `-0` and > `-9` like the current text does would help those who wonder what the > option, used in a script written by somebody else that they are > given to maintain, mean, better than the updated text that does not > even allow /-9 in their pager to look for the description, if you > only had `-<number>` or `-#`. > > Also, unless we take `-47`, I do not think it is a good idea to > spell it as `-<number>`. Perhaps `-<digit>` is OK, but it shares > exactly the same issue as `-<number>` I mentioned above.
Maybe we can say `-0 ... -9` to indicate the syntax, while both the endpoints are common but special case.
Also, we don't mention default compression level (`-6`?).
-- An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara