Re: [PATCH] doc: fetch: document `--jobs=0` behavior
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Feb 19, 2026, 18:59 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqq4inc5zlt.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <aZb2acEvAtNmt-4j@pks.im>
Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:
Show 18 quoted lines
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2026 at 07:32:39PM +0000, Daniel D. Beck via GitGitGadget wrote: >> diff --git a/Documentation/fetch-options.adoc b/Documentation/fetch-options.adoc >> index fcba46ee9e..e15cbc51f2 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/fetch-options.adoc >> +++ b/Documentation/fetch-options.adoc >> @@ -234,6 +234,8 @@ endif::git-pull[] >> `--jobs=<n>`:: >> Parallelize all forms of fetching up to _<n>_ jobs at a time. >> + >> +A value of 0 will use some reasonable default. > > Can't we do better though than saying "some reasonable default"? As a > user I would wonder what this is even supposed to mean. True, we don't > do so either in the documentation of "fetch.parallel". But arguably, we > should update both sites to reflect the status quo. > > Going into the code we seem to fall back to `online_cpus()`. So should > we document this accordingly?
I do not have time to dig this out myself from ancient discussion threads, but we probably had the same discussion when "git config --help" described the fetch.parallel with exactly the same phrasing and decided to leave the exact implementation detail out of the end-user facing documentation.
Thanks.