git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Gladysh <agladysh@gmail.com>
To: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: gitk pays too much attention to file timestamps
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 03:47:15 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <n2kc6c947f61004061647ybb6c2f55zc70197362764ef8@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100406233601.GA27533@progeny.tock>

Jonathan,

thank you for the explanation!

<...>

> gitk is something of a passive observer of the index, which is
> actually something I like about it.  This keeps it relatively fast
> and can be useful when trying to understand other commands.

I *think* that 1.6.x didn't have this issue. (Sorry, can't check now.)

> I am not sure how other people use gitk, though.  Maybe this would
> be worth changing.  For a reference point, another command in a
> very similar situation is ‘git diff’: people who want the speedup
> from avoiding refreshing the index with that command use

>        [diff]
>                autoRefreshIndex = false

> in their configuration file, so the rest of us don’t have to suffer
> from the confusing behavior.

> As some kind of evil compromise, it might be worth teaching gitk
> to check the same configuration and run update-index --refresh in
> getcommits{} if and only if it is unset or set to true.

> Thoughts?

That's fine as far as I'm concerned.

The current behaviour is really annoying.

If I want something fast, I do not use GUI tools. Gitk starts up
rather slowly on my box anyway.

Alexander.

  reply	other threads:[~2010-04-06 23:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-04-06 22:57 gitk pays too much attention to file timestamps Alexander Gladysh
2010-04-06 23:15 ` Markus Heidelberg
2010-04-06 23:36 ` Jonathan Nieder
2010-04-06 23:47   ` Alexander Gladysh [this message]
2010-04-07  0:43     ` [PATCH/RFC] gitk: refresh index before checking for local changes Jonathan Nieder
2010-04-07  1:07       ` Alexander Gladysh
2010-04-07  1:16       ` Jonathan Nieder
2010-04-07  2:21       ` A Large Angry SCM
2010-04-07  2:57         ` Jonathan Nieder
2010-04-07  5:47         ` Junio C Hamano
2010-04-07 11:21           ` A Large Angry SCM
2010-04-07 16:48           ` Avery Pennarun
2010-04-07 14:36         ` Jon Seymour
2010-04-06 23:58   ` gitk pays too much attention to file timestamps Avery Pennarun
2010-04-07  1:01     ` Jonathan Nieder

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=n2kc6c947f61004061647ybb6c2f55zc70197362764ef8@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=agladysh@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).