Subject: Progress reporting (was: VCS comparison table)

From: Jakub Narebski <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 11:18:56 +0100

Jakub Narebski wrote:
> Ilpo Nyyssönen wrote:

>> 3. Understanding output
>> 
>> G: Speaks a language of its own, hard to understand. No progress
>> reported for long lasting operations.
>> 
>> B: Could maybe speak a bit more. Progress reporting is quite good.
> 
> Which long lasting operations lack progress bar/progress reporting?
> "git clone" and "git fetch"/"git pull" both have progress report
> for both "smart" git://, git+ssh:// and local protocols, and "dumb"
> http://, https://, ftp://, rsync:// protocols. "git rebase" has
> progress report. "git am" has progress report.

I was bitten lately by git lack of progress reporting for git-push.
While it nicely reports local progress (generating data) it unfortunately
lacks wget like, "curl -o" like or scp like pack upload progress
reporting. And while usually push is fast, initial push of whole
project to empty repository can be quite slow on low-bandwidth link
(or busy network).

git version 1.4.3.3 on local side, git+ssh:// protocol, git version
1.4.3.3.g9ab2 on the remote side (repo.or.cz).
-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git