Re: [PATCHv3 0/7] git describe blob
On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 10 quoted lines
> Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I agree, "something" is better than "nothing", and we can work to
>> improve "something" in the future, especially after we get more real
>> use and see what people think. Only question would be how much do we
>> need to document the current behavior might be open for improvement?
>
> If
>
> - it always digs to the root of the history no matter what; and/or
> - it almost always yields correct but suboptimal result
this is not, for the lack of knowing what the optimal result is.
Show 7 quoted lines
>
> then that fact must be documented in BUGS section, possibly a brief
> descrition of why that limitation is there, with a hint to invite
> people to look into fixing it.
>
> We should mark it prominently as experimental and advertise it as
> such. "It's too slow in real project to be usable"
I found it quite fast after fixing the history walking, but still.
> and "Its output
> bases the answer on an irrelevant commit" are not something we want
> our users to experience, except for those with inclination to (or
> ability and time to) help improve the feature.
I think the current documentation states exactly this.
Thanks.
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>