From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2EAF1F488 for ; Wed, 8 May 2019 22:25:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727265AbfEHWZF (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 May 2019 18:25:05 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:52508 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1726700AbfEHWZE (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 May 2019 18:25:04 -0400 Received: (qmail 4059 invoked by uid 109); 8 May 2019 22:25:05 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Wed, 08 May 2019 22:25:05 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 28680 invoked by uid 111); 8 May 2019 22:25:41 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) SMTP; Wed, 08 May 2019 18:25:41 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 08 May 2019 18:25:02 -0400 Date: Wed, 8 May 2019 18:25:02 -0400 From: Jeff King To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: Junio C Hamano , Eric Wong , git@vger.kernel.org, SZEDER =?utf-8?B?R8OhYm9y?= , Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] repack: enable bitmaps by default on bare repos Message-ID: <20190508222502.GA19990@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20190314091254.nescpfp3n6mbjpmh@dcvr> <87zhoz8b9o.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <20190410225721.GA32262@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20190504013713.GC17551@sigill.intra.peff.net> <87a7g2iuem.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <20190507074506.GF28060@sigill.intra.peff.net> <8736lqisyx.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <20190508071105.GA14043@sigill.intra.peff.net> <87sgtohqk9.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87sgtohqk9.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 08, 2019 at 06:13:58PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > I do wonder if this really needs to be part of the progress bar. The > > goal of the progress bar is to give the user a sense that work is > > happening, and (if possible, but not for "enumerating") an idea of when > > it might finish. If the trace code can already do detailed timings, then > > shouldn't we just be encouraging people to use that? > [...] > - progress->title = title; > + progress->title = "Reticulating splines"; Heh, OK, that's a fair reductio ad absurdum of my point. I guess what I was trying to say is that we don't need to go overboard with accuracy as long as we're giving a vague sense of the work. Precision measurements can be handled through a different system. But I don't mind if you can find a way to do these kind of cascaded progress meters in a way that is pleasing to the eye and not hard to handle in the callers of the code. -Peff