From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Angelo Borsotti Subject: Re: erratic behavior commit --allow-empty Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2012 10:49:37 +0200 Message-ID: References: <506AA51E.9010209@viscovery.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: git To: Johannes Sixt X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 02 10:51:46 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TIyB6-0006Vg-4c for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Oct 2012 10:50:08 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754773Ab2JBIty (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2012 04:49:54 -0400 Received: from mail-vc0-f174.google.com ([209.85.220.174]:61945 "EHLO mail-vc0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752192Ab2JBIti (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Oct 2012 04:49:38 -0400 Received: by vcbfo13 with SMTP id fo13so6643395vcb.19 for ; Tue, 02 Oct 2012 01:49:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=4L9dCcrY6f2Iv8NklD7ZK/+RUrX+DEvltCbT/DqsOlg=; b=DLi6/Znc1IVLupQBrh6Zj/gQPfZ9Oxss8+6EAzRrjKKATPZJl2E9tNuhwFM6qJntuw 9vYpOL9MSm89P/jKqVzi7RlfstOlllVRguzzuzmn3c095qHn0B8IVUSnct0DecUAibis ri7f0KkkD84/zD118SoJE30KLBm8LGaePEUA1rwyJWsTt3P0LLO3XvaIxTtArj/PwniD JMgJZrkAQgV9LROd9KEEkv9OVSZPC+BeXdq23j0tExaNm4J7gtn/KA0/XV6lmhh2GbV/ OSZDp9fTbpRyIBpvNmWMP7pfR1VevclbNWxQ3nnB5RYJQWPM4wKm47JOlK7L0gS8PH8V 1iKg== Received: by 10.52.90.2 with SMTP id bs2mr7941105vdb.23.1349167777493; Tue, 02 Oct 2012 01:49:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.58.68.40 with HTTP; Tue, 2 Oct 2012 01:49:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <506AA51E.9010209@viscovery.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi having such a time-dependent behavior is not nice. It means that the user must know it, and wait patiently before issuing the command, or in a script add a sleep before the command. The choice is then between adding a warning in the man page ("please wait at least a second before executing the command") or adding a sleep inside the command itself. Obviously, the second alternative looks much more appealing. Thank you -Angelo