-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.2k
Closed
Description
I like LFS' current output, but think it could be improved. For example:
$ git lfs fetch --all
Scanning for all objects ever referenced...
Fetching objects...
✔ 8 objects found, done
# why does a Git LFS command remind us what it is?
# an "LFS" prefix makes sense for smudge/clean filters though.
Git LFS: (8 of 8 files) 900 KB / 900 KB, doneCompare that to the migrate output:
$ git lfs migrate info --everything
migrate: Sorting commits: ..., done
migrate: Examining commits: 100% (14/14), done
*.gitattributes 420 B 4/4 files(s) 100%
*.gif 391 B 3/3 files(s) 100%
*.bin 378 B 3/4 files(s) 75%
*.png 260 B 2/2 files(s) 100%
*.JPG 130 B 1/1 files(s) 100%Each task is a single line, with a running counter until that task is done. It just looks more consistent with typical Git output:
$ git pull
remote: Counting objects: 63, done.
remote: Compressing objects: 100% (29/29), done.
remote: Total 63 (delta 50), reused 40 (delta 34), pack-reused 0
Unpacking objects: 100% (63/63), done.I like how #2732 merges the two packages a bit, but I think more can be done here too. Why do we need a progress package at this point? Can we update the callers to use a log.Task implementation instead?
Reactions are currently unavailable
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
No labels