On 10/05/2017 05:16 PM, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
Hi,
jameson.mille...@gmail.com wrote:
This patch series is the second part of [1], which was split into 2
parts. The first part, added an optimization in the directory listing
logic to not scan the contents of ignored directories and was merged
to master with commit 5aaa7fd3. This patch series includes the second
part to expose additional arguments to the --ignored option on the
status command.
Thanks.
This patch series teaches the status command more options to control
which ignored files are reported independently of the which untracked
[...]
Our application (Visual Studio) has a specific set of requirements
about how it wants untracked / ignored files reported by git status.
[...]
The reason for controlling these behaviors separately is that there
can be a significant performance impact to scanning the contents of
[....]
As a more concrete example, on Windows, Visual Studio creates a bin/
and obj/ directory inside of the project where it writes all .obj and
[...]
I see this information is also in patch 1/6. That's a very good
thing, since that makes performance numbers involved more concrete
about which patch brings them about and it becomes part of permanent
history that way --- thanks.
But it took me a while to notice, and before then, I was trying to
read through the cover letter to get an overview of which patches I am
supposed to look at. For next time, could the cover letter say
something like "See patches 1 and 2 for more details about the
motivation" instead of repeating the commit message content? That
would save reviewers some time.
Will do - thank you for the feedback!
Thanks,
Jonathan
