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
next prev parent 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 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).