Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] format-patch: have progress option while generating patches
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2017-08-14 22:42:27
Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:
If it's smooth, the (50,1) case is slightly nicer in that it puts the progress in front of the user more quickly. I'm not sure if that's actually worth pushing an additional decision onto the person writing the calling code, though (especially when we are just now puzzling out the method for making such a decision from first principles). So I'd vote to drop that parameter entirely. And if 1 second seems noticeably snappier, then we should probably just move everything to a 1 second delay (I don't have a strong feeling either way).
Sounds like a good idea to me. I've already locally tweaked Kevin's patch to use (0,2) instead of (0,1) without introducing the simpler wrapper. It should be trivial to do a wrapper to catch and migrate all the (0,2) users to a start_delayed_progress() that takes neither percentage or time with mechanical replacement.