Re: [PATCH] Fixup no-progress for fetch & clone

From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Date: Feb 24, 2007, 02:47 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.0.82.0702232141040.29426@xanadu.home>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0702240336130.22628@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

On Sat, 24 Feb 2007, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Hi,
> 
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> 
> > And I would do that and _only_ that to supress progress.  No messing 
> > around with protocol extensions.  Just filter out the unwanted messages 
> > locally and be happy.
> 
> This is easier, but I'd feel dirty about it. I mean, you set up a signal 
> every so often, have a side band, demultiplex the side band, and for what? 
> To just ignore it?

Yes sir.  But of course this isn't the default.

And it isn't even the common case either. So I think a bit of cheating to keep the common case simple isn't that bad.

And it is not like if the whole thing was thrown away. For example I think messages like

	remote: Writing 1234 objects.

are good messages to have in a log file even when progress display is filtered out. So the sideband demultiplexing is useful in that case as well.

Nicolas