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-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 588E61F66E for ; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 22:44:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730381AbgHQWoP (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Aug 2020 18:44:15 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:61239 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729777AbgHQWoP (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Aug 2020 18:44:15 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 358D2DCD99; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 18:44:13 -0400 (EDT) (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=fbd4ETjTth13gdsII6rSVUv+c5Q=; b=pgZuwP 0nXeyM6ZiD9GslEZE1eHsex3607PYimzPkmryU2QwtMyrVqyE8fJThSGEyOwZQmq 4TOZpldwRAvTkeYItUw1M32LeIJlx24cgsrV1bE2s95x7ORAhgH1YqjG6C7KZL9X MMmWNlv/xT21+OhCRTW3M50WatE/pF5i1VQMs= 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=ap93cIOPuFYqhgOc6nTHsxWs8pEFd6uO sA8Bwh9IO9CCpQyK1SXBAItgM2nfFHrCMRzokzEpJ7LWeSkbpC41B+pjTQkl5Igx aXJLHGmWn2Semz2SlVL/KskC8p3rCbYm7MlZBiCqp+bGbITSqJ1AxnhGyo+j8Md6 BV98njZQp0M= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D9BBDCD98; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 18:44:13 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.75.7.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 734C3DCD91; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 18:44:10 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Emily Shaffer Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] progress: create progress struct in 'verbose' mode References: <20200710014242.1088216-1-emilyshaffer@google.com> <20200710014242.1088216-2-emilyshaffer@google.com> <20200714001504.GI3189386@google.com> <20200817221938.GA331156@google.com> Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 15:44:08 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200817221938.GA331156@google.com> (Emily Shaffer's message of "Mon, 17 Aug 2020 15:19:38 -0700") 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: 2A90E07A-E0DB-11EA-BB2B-F0EA2EB3C613-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Emily Shaffer writes: > The main concern I saw here was "we are doing a lot of work that isn't > used if the user doesn't want to log traces" - should I approach a > reroll of this topic by trying to be smarter about whether to set > 'quiet' or 'print' or 'verbose' or whatever it is renamed to, based on > whether there is a trace destination? Then for systems which are logging > traces the extra work is worth it, but for everyone else it can function > as before. > > I don't love it from a design perspective - it feels a little like > progress module is looking a little too closely at trace module > internals. Isn't that primarily due to the decision to tie progress and trace too closely? If so, perhaps that needs to be revisited? I dunno.