On Thu, Oct 09, 2025 at 07:42:40PM -0500, Justin Tobler wrote:

On 25/10/09 05:09PM, Justin Tobler wrote:

quoted

On 25/09/27 09:32AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

With Devil's advocate hat on, a single command that gives a set of
stats that are "key" to a goal of a single use case may not be as
useful as a collection of commands, each of which gives stats on one
aspect of the repository, that can be combined to help you address
various different goals.

Good points. From my perspective, the benefit of having a single command
here is to provide a simple means to generate a report of the general
repository shape. In this context, "key stats" reflect certain
charactistics about the repository that may be concerning performance
wise for typical repository operations or just of interest in general.

One of the motivations here is to enable a user to easily generate such
a report and be able to share it with others that may not have access to
the underlying repository.

I think this still could leave room for more fine-grained commands that
can surface more targeted information about a repository with other
goals in mind in the future though.

Thinking about this some more, a single "stats" command is indeed rather
vauge. Furthermore, as Junio mentioned, there could be other aspects of
a repository that we want to display stats for in the future.

Since the goal of this command is to surface info about a repositories
structure, may we should instead call this command `git repo structure`?
Or something else along those lines that in more specific and related to
goal of the command?

Some alternatives that come to my mind:

  - inspect
  - analyze
  - scan
  - survey
  - measure

I don't have any specific preference. What I like though is that those
are verbs, which makes it a bit more natural to use them.

Feel free to take any or ignore all of these.

Patrick