Re: [PATCH] Change 'Deltifying objects' to 'Delta compressing objects'

["Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org>]

Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> wrote:
> Frankly, I think effort should be spent on the refs update display at 
> this point.  Something that looks like:
> 
> * refs/heads/origin: fast forward to branch 'master' of git://gi
> t.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6
>   old..new: 66ffb04..4fa4d23
> 
> [ note that I arbitrarily cut the long line before the 80th column to 
>   show the effect within an email ]
> 
> You usually get long lines that gets wrapped, so that means 3 lines of 
> screen space for one updated branches.  Is the "66ffb04..4fa4d23" 
> information really useful?  Might someone ever care?

The reason its formatted the way it is today is someone can grab
that line into a copy-paste buffer and throw it onto a "git-log"
or "gitk" command line with ease to see what new stuff has come in.

Me, I just use the reflog if I care (`origin@{1}..origin`) to see
what a fetch changed in the tracking branch.

However I *don't* need the remote branch name or the remote URL,
especially if we are storing it into a tracking branch.  That's most
likely coming from a configured remote that the user fetches from
frequently.  I don't think about Linus' URL, I think about the fact
that in my linux-2.6 repository his directory is my origin remote.

Maybe something like this would be more useful:

 * origin: fast-forwarded: 66ffb04..4fa4d23

Or if you are using refs/remotes style tracking branches:

 * origin/master: fast-forwarded: 66ffb04..4fa4d23
 * origin/pu: forcing update: 66ffb04..4fa4d23

Too terse?  Yea, probably.  But it is a whole lot shorter.


My other pet peeve here is the display from send-pack and
receive-pack when you push a ref.  Hello?

  updating 'refs/heads/master'
    from de61e42b539ffbd28d2a2ba827bb0eb79767057b
    to   d7e56dbc4f60f6bd238e8612783541d89f006fb7
  ...
  refs/heads/master: de61e42b539ffbd28d2a2ba827bb0eb79767057b -> d7e56dbc4f60f6bd238e8612783541d89f006fb7

That's like 4 too many SHA-1 strings for the average user.

-- 
Shawn.