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=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE 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 29F091F463 for ; Sat, 14 Sep 2019 13:58:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389032AbfINN6k (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Sep 2019 09:58:40 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-f194.google.com ([209.85.214.194]:42267 "EHLO mail-pl1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388942AbfINN6j (ORCPT ); Sat, 14 Sep 2019 09:58:39 -0400 Received: by mail-pl1-f194.google.com with SMTP id e5so3487270pls.9 for ; Sat, 14 Sep 2019 06:58:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:subject:in-reply-to:cc:from:to:message-id :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aHV4YDbBVq+ZTYNOiJhL+ML1acL+SRcueLSm4p0haP8=; b=G+uINyCGmZZT0Zt79cRPXUXmXYMVBij909eHunjGpeU6G0byhKjHk3RHDClnO/kEn3 FUvmfS9E9UaOjLe/lRMluKK19Z7S9RzrSpqBLvisZVvmEOutfZXlFMKKaHdIgP3KXe1N WuLyMiMeEwiOExJ1ZLH7zl/gplyA54bYUfYGtq1KwH+6/HDJj91nyFSsbNziEBSyOXkX Fr/tAj/HUPQz3bTosorYYnT80Z1jP6A9ztj6UCO22LnTnBCYoOgSmIlvxoMURiFF38AK fuJIDEYFpjPP0eikSFRkz9P7Eymb5lJfD++1MlMz3JNg7jb4E0aLDSmQPUtK4unxHUoN wD9Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVTP01LIXba9nJ/CQ/FNuejQSelBupaNvxwUGYpAn9QwRufY2J+ fKbLrfXmCAO9r4ASndKw4SvtzQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqypJwXPuk+jsN5ceNpm3YAgheUNd0F0btaLzBR+p0h+t/MyiS7OtwEQLXTzskJo8ktjstbR/g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d888:: with SMTP id b8mr52732095plz.272.1568469517479; Sat, 14 Sep 2019 06:58:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (amx-tls3.starhub.net.sg. [203.116.164.13]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u1sm23487977pgi.28.2019.09.14.06.58.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 14 Sep 2019 06:58:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2019 06:58:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Original-Date: Sat, 14 Sep 2019 06:35:40 PDT (-0700) Subject: Re: pd/fetch-jobs, was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Sep 2019, #01; Sat, 7) In-Reply-To: CC: Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de, git@vger.kernel.org From: Palmer Dabbelt To: gitster@pobox.com Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 (MHng) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 11:02:42 PDT (-0700), gitster@pobox.com wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > >>> * pd/fetch-jobs (2019-08-13) 5 commits >>> . fetch: make --jobs control submodules and remotes >>> . fetch: add the --submodule-fetch-jobs option >>> . fetch: add the fetch.jobs config key >>> . fetch: add the "--fetch-jobs" option >>> . fetch: rename max_children to max_children_for_submodules >>> >>> "git fetch --jobs" is getting taught to also run fetch jobs in >>> parallel when fetching from multiple remote repositories. >>> >>> Comments? >> >> I still stand by my suggestion that it is undesirable (and makes the >> code much more complicated than necessary) to end up with three options. >> Having only `--jobs=` would be the ideal solution. > > I think exposing "--jobs" as the primary UI element is a good longer > term goal; the approach taken in the intermediate step would be a > necessary one for backward compatibility. > > I stopped carrying it in 'pu' some weeks ago (I suspect it had some > interactions with other topics in flight, by causing either test > failures or textual conflicts). Perhaps somebody interested enough > in the topic can resurrect it. Sorry, I'm somewhat new to the git development process. I'm happy to re-spin the patch set, I'm just not sure what do to here. It looks like there are some test failures when I rebase to the latest master, which I'm happy to fix. Just let me know if I should: * Send all 5 patches, under the assumption that the last one will not get merged until some time later. * Send just the first 4 patches, holding onto the last one for later. * Send just a single patch, which wouldn't add the --fetch-jobs and --submodule-fetch-jobs arguments.