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.
next prev parent 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).