From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pete Harlan Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] clone: simplify progress message Date: Sun, 09 May 2010 16:10:57 -0700 Message-ID: <4BE74101.20900@pcharlan.com> References: <4BE60E89.8010709@pcharlan.com> <20100509110221.GA16639@coredump.intra.peff.net> <4BE7166A.5030107@pcharlan.com> <7vr5lk90yg.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Jeff King , git list To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 10 01:11:06 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OBFeM-0006vw-7s for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 10 May 2010 01:11:06 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753468Ab0EIXK7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 May 2010 19:10:59 -0400 Received: from caibbdcaaaaf.dreamhost.com ([208.113.200.5]:43605 "EHLO swarthymail-a2.g.dreamhost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753458Ab0EIXK7 (ORCPT ); Sun, 9 May 2010 19:10:59 -0400 Received: from [192.168.0.119] (185.132-78-65.ftth.swbr.surewest.net [65.78.132.185]) by swarthymail-a2.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67B24EE6D8; Sun, 9 May 2010 16:10:58 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100423 Thunderbird/3.0.4 In-Reply-To: <7vr5lk90yg.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 05/09/2010 03:15 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Pete Harlan writes: > >> On 05/09/2010 04:02 AM, Jeff King wrote: >>> On Sat, May 08, 2010 at 06:23:21PM -0700, Pete Harlan wrote: >>> >>>> "git clone foo bar" currently reports "Cloning into >>>> /path/to/bar/.git". Change this message to "Cloning into bar" to more >>>> closely match the user's expectation. >>> >>> I am a little torn on this. For most users, it is just another >>> implementation detail that makes git's output more confusing. And it is >>> likely to be the very first git message seen by many people. But at the >>> same time, it is telling you where the repository actually is, which is >>> something that can help users learn about how git works. >>> >>> I guess it comes down to how much detail we want to show. >> >> For me it isn't only a matter of detail; I find "Cloning into >> bar/.git" misleading, since bar is getting more than a .git directory. > > That is also misleading, as cloning is done into bar/.git and everything > else happens locally as part of the checkout. > > I didn't want to go into nitpicky details, but you asked for it ;-) Fair enough :) >> Pete Harlan (2): >> clone: have progress report mention top level dir, not git dir >> clone: add bare clone to the progress message > > I think the squashing these two into one patch makes quite a lot of > sense. Does any of the existing test need adjustments, by the way? No, the test (t5601-clone.sh) looks for "Clon", so the new message passes that just as well. I could add a new test that ensures that "bare repository" shows up in the message when --bare is passed if you think that's worthwhile. --Pete