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,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,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 BA2F51F466 for ; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 18:48:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727446AbgBDSse (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:48:34 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:60240 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727331AbgBDSse (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:48:34 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B508251D36; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:48:32 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=fBJn9tCSGNQmTTSSz/akqoUp93g=; b=nj5DHj xcqimvWAcI1s84q5b3R67oM2KnOin5mKpjaZqov6ReFqABcRTIqSktaO+xjHCD5w ehNyeX+H1XXDLCthwG4LtNGMJdIFKh2G8c8fPqxfjXBi/v8x62jy1XIGe7qk95Pi MiG5qQMR0n/P9x5i6VH3C68/6VROvaQlbHbD0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Hz89JtpmpP/LvkuKviG4iqwGwBGGgm5K t/Qn5g2GWez8sF4HeHIPlJ1U9tkDSs+fXcmcpx0Afia74YfyCyNyR2VeMjH1l4pm nBNVfg4Cv6kpHkHqmzIj13K5ka2HivD5gCmYTrlBVVQIyOMvC71B+9ZkoybSjEta iVWUVncZXDE= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ACA7B51D35; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:48:32 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1A02651D34; Tue, 4 Feb 2020 13:48:32 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: emilyshaffer@google.com Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 12/15] bugreport: count loose objects References: <20200124033436.81097-1-emilyshaffer@google.com> <20200124033436.81097-13-emilyshaffer@google.com> Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2020 10:48:30 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20200124033436.81097-13-emilyshaffer@google.com> (emilyshaffer@google.com's message of "Thu, 23 Jan 2020 19:34:33 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F0E578E0-477E-11EA-A0EC-D1361DBA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org emilyshaffer@google.com writes: > From: Emily Shaffer > > The number of unpacked objects in a user's repository may help us > understand the root of the problem they're seeing, especially if a > command is running unusually slowly. > > Helped-by: Johannes Schindelin > Signed-off-by: Emily Shaffer > --- > The refactor removed much of the code Dscho suggested; and yet it > remains true that he helped me while developing this commit (although > his suggestions didn't survive). Shall I leave the Helped-by line or > remove it? You two collectively thought about viable alternatives and decided to reject what was not wanted in the final result, and not having that rejected code was good for the project, right? If so, I would say it still is the help that deserves recognition. After all, making the result better by removing things is harder than by adding things ;-) > bugreport.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 46 insertions(+) > ... The patch text looked sensible.