Junio C Hamano writes:
> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes:
>
>> Housekeeping jobs like auto gc generally should not get in the way.
>> Users who are pushing may not want to wait until auto gc is done on
>> the server. Give a hint for those users that it's safe now to break
>> "git push" and stop waiting.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
>> ---
>> This bandage patch may be a good compromise between running auto gc
>> and not annoying users much.
>>
>> If I'm not mistaken, when ^C on "git push" this way, gc will still be
>> running until it needs to print something out (which it should not
>> normally because of --quiet). The user won't see gc errors, but the
>> user generally can't do much anyway.
>
> If you are over local transport, I would think you would kill the
> both ends. Also, wouldn't killing "git push" before it is done
> talking with the receive-pack stop it before it has a chance to
> update the remote tracking refs to pretend as if it fetched from
> there immediately after a push?
>
> So, no. I do not think we should ever encourage "if this bothers
> you, you can ^C it". Making it not to bother is fine, though.
Instead of adding a boolean --break-ok that is hidden, why not
adding an exposed boolean --daemonize, and let auto-gc run in the
background? With the recent "do not let more than one gc run at the
same time", that should give a lot more pleasant end user
experience, no?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
