Re: [PATCH 3/4] remote prune: print the list of pruned branches

Olivier Marin [off-list ref] writes:

Thanks.  I've queued the series (with minor fixups and rewording) to
'next' already, hoping that we can merge this fix to 'master' before
1.5.6.

But I am very tempted to also apply the following on top.  Thoughts?

-- >8 --
[PATCH] "remote prune": be quiet when there is nothing to prune

The previous commit made it always say "Pruning $remote" but reported the
URL only when there is something to prune.  Make it consistent by not
saying anything at all when there is nothing to prune.

Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <redacted>
---
 builtin-remote.c |    5 +++--
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/builtin-remote.c b/builtin-remote.c
index 4b00cf9..145dd85 100644
--- a/builtin-remote.c
+++ b/builtin-remote.c

@@ -560,12 +560,13 @@ static int prune(int argc, const char **argv)
 
 		get_remote_ref_states(*argv, &states, 1);
 
-		printf("Pruning %s\n", *argv);
-		if (states.stale.nr)
+		if (states.stale.nr) {
+			printf("Pruning %s\n", *argv);
 			printf("URL: %s\n",
 			       states.remote->url_nr
 			       ? states.remote->url[0]
 			       : "(no URL)");
+		}
 
 		for (i = 0; i < states.stale.nr; i++) {
 			const char *refname = states.stale.items[i].util;

-- 
1.5.6.rc2.26.g8c37

Junio C Hamano a écrit :

Thanks.  I've queued the series (with minor fixups and rewording) to
'next' already, hoping that we can merge this fix to 'master' before
1.5.6.

Thanks. I find your "would prune/pruned" better.

But I am very tempted to also apply the following on top.  Thoughts?

Actually, I did that to stay consistent with "git remote update" and, as
a user, I prefer to see something. That said, I not opposed to your patch.

Olivier.