All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Cc: "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: I: git-fetch: -n option disappeared but git-fetch(1) still describe it
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 07:50:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <47D8CEA6.5040301@op5.se> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.1.00.0803121710460.1656@racer.site>

Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, Andreas Ericsson wrote:
> 
>> Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 12 Mar 2008, Andreas Ericsson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> git-fetch builtinification (commit v1.5.3.2-93-gb888d61) 
>>>>> apparently dropped -n option (alias to --no-tags) documented in 
>>>>> Documentation/fetch-options.txt
>>>>>
>>>>> Either builtin-fetch.c or Documentation/fetch-options.txt should 
>>>>> be adjusted to sync the code with its docs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Original bug report: 
>>>>> https://bugzilla.altlinux.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14870
>>>> I have a (very) vague memory that git-fetch.sh had to iterate over 
>>>> tags one by one, making tag-heavy projects excruciatingly slow to 
>>>> fetch from with the shellscript version. Some pathological case with 
>>>> 2700 tags was presented where a fetch took nearly an hour, iirc. 
>>>> AFAIR, the builtinification (or was it a protocol extension?) 
>>>> reduced that time to something around 10 seconds for the 
>>>> pathological case.
>>> AFAIR this was helped by the fetch--tool helper, even at the time of 
>>> non-builtin fetch.
>>>
>>>> Does anyone else have a sharper memory of what caused the -n option 
>>>> to be dropped?
>>> AFAICT this was done because of the parsopt'ification.  But I forgot 
>>> the details.
>>>
>> I had a look at the code. It seems the new way of specifying -n is to 
>> say --no-tags or -t 0, or --tags=0 (although I'm not well-versed enough 
>> in the parseopt thing to be sure). I have no time now, but I'll take a 
>> stab at adding the -n option back tomorrow if nobody beats me to it.
> 
> Maybe like this (completely untested, that will be your task tomorrow):
> 

Looks like how I thought it should be. Test passed fine, both real and
automated. Proper patch incoming in a minute.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

  reply	other threads:[~2008-03-13  6:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-03-12 10:51 I: git-fetch: -n option disappeared but git-fetch(1) still describe it Dmitry V. Levin
2008-03-12 14:52 ` Andreas Ericsson
2008-03-12 16:04   ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-03-12 16:06     ` Andreas Ericsson
2008-03-12 16:11       ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-03-13  6:50         ` Andreas Ericsson [this message]
2008-03-13  7:13           ` [PATCH] git fetch: Take '-n' to mean '--no-tags' Andreas Ericsson
2008-03-13  7:30             ` Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=47D8CEA6.5040301@op5.se \
    --to=ae@op5.se \
    --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ldv@altlinux.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.