From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD, STOX_REPLY_TYPE,T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 127521F667 for ; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 08:59:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750794AbdHLI7g (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Aug 2017 04:59:36 -0400 Received: from e1i188.smtp2go.com ([103.36.108.188]:56349 "EHLO e1i188.smtp2go.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750761AbdHLI7f (ORCPT ); Sat, 12 Aug 2017 04:59:35 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 519 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sat, 12 Aug 2017 04:59:35 EDT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=smtphost.com; s=m1fbw0.a1-4.dyn; h=Feedback-ID:X-Smtpcorp-Track:Date: Subject:To:From:Reply-To:Message-ID:Sender:List-Unsubscribe; bh=aynmcWTkypGT1LkFiwOUZ3AdQfAB1Tib7ASNogYnhbQ=; b=EZgsg4y/j7CUvcgtWlxqKx9lDU L7RE3FVdllimd6lC6ofDu6/q687G1eR6o31WxvKJXUW9g0lLCIQxiJz540FUoQFf/8arUNrfzI53f GYwBui/RuWt4JXXvmz9V9C6Kv2iQubQGUVQ3GCmtnXXpGcda6SBYzrsSALDf16ZQqoGJ0tyqBMmUW 2PlWh7R1H0GaN/KrBgks5LFEonhLtkFZWFB1BYvH83w/ljTJgRneC6PkxpfeSM8FIZYW6+fcZicoZ uLE2VdQcK7ALfb05BhE3c68T2nhs5JMkoKgi0cMn3WencW/IlZ/v7cGoP3OHry2kM+9rB+5Xhvu8p NjfrITyw==; Message-ID: Reply-To: "Philip Oakley" From: "Philip Oakley" To: "Junio C Hamano" , "Jeff King" Cc: "Kevin Willford" , , "Kevin Willford" References: <20170531150427.7820-1-kewillf@microsoft.com> <20170810183256.12668-2-kewillf@microsoft.com> <20170810232033.46ujnozvnodkguog@sigill.intra.peff.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] format-patch: have progress option while generating patches Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 09:06:18 +0100 Organization: OPDS MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Smtpcorp-Track: 1dgS7qr_ZjZvRD.MIFSC0-s5 Feedback-ID: 66524m:66524aMf6O2Y:66524sgKmGmluqH:SMTPCORP X-Report-Abuse: Please forward a copy of this message, including all headers, to Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org From: "Junio C Hamano" > Jeff King writes: > >> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 02:32:55PM -0400, Kevin Willford wrote: >> >>> @@ -1493,6 +1496,8 @@ int cmd_format_patch(int argc, const char **argv, >>> const char *prefix) >>> OPT_FILENAME(0, "signature-file", &signature_file, >>> N_("add a signature from a file")), >>> OPT__QUIET(&quiet, N_("don't print the patch filenames")), >>> + OPT_BOOL(0, "progress", &show_progress, >>> + N_("show progress while generating patches")), >> >> Earlier I suggested allowing --progress="custom text" since this may be >> driven as plumbing for other commands. But I don't think there's any >> need to worry about it now. It can be added seamlessly later if we find >> such a caller. >> >>> @@ -1752,8 +1757,12 @@ int cmd_format_patch(int argc, const char **argv, >>> const char *prefix) >>> start_number--; >>> } >>> rev.add_signoff = do_signoff; >>> + >>> + if (show_progress) >>> + progress = start_progress_delay(_("Generating patches"), total, 0, 1); >> >> I don't really have an opinion on a 1 second delay versus 2. I thought >> we used 2 pretty consistently, though grepping around I do see a couple >> of 1's. It probably doesn't matter, but just a curiosity. > > Yeah, I also thought 2-second was what we used by default. Perhaps > we would want to bring others in line? Surely the choice should depend on the purpose of the delay. IIRC the 1 second between patches on the formal 'sent' time was simply to ensure the patches had the right sequence. Delays for warnings and progress have different purposes, so I think it's more about the purpose than standardising the time (along with expectations [least surprise] if other messages are displayed). -- Philip