Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> writes: > Except for the minor nits above, I think this is a good change.
Oh, I forgot to mention one thing. I am not sure if this should be called ULONG. "unsigned long"-ness is not the most important part of this thing from the end-user's point of view, and also from the point of view of the programmer who supports end-users by using this new feature. It is "unlike OPT_INTEGER, the user can specify it as a human readble scaled quantity" that is the reason to use this new thing. I think we discussed to introduce OPT_HUMINT (HUM stands for HUMAN, obviously) or some name like that a few years ago to do exactly this, but that is not a great name, either. I was tempted to suggest a name that has "size" in it, but because places that we may conceivably want to use it in the future would be to specify: - sizes, e.g. "split the packfiles into 4.3G chunks". - counts, e.g. "show me the most recent 2k commits". - bandwidth, e.g. "limit the transfer to consume at most 2M bps". which is not limited to size, it is not a very good idea, either. OPT_SCALED_ULONG(), or something with "scaled" in its name, perhaps? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
