comment
This commit is contained in:
parent
442558aecf
commit
079c5a03c6
2 changed files with 24 additions and 10 deletions
|
@ -62,14 +62,4 @@ That's not a lot more verbose than the earlier version, and it ensures that
|
|||
consumers of the progress objects have all possible information available
|
||||
(including the name of the remote being downloaded from in the above
|
||||
example).
|
||||
|
||||
Less verbose version:
|
||||
|
||||
{"progress-id":"1","action":{"command":"get","key":"SHA256E-s5242880--82cb4363f596cb66e7bc6e4cbfd2bfe8a8b6ac7e6d02557cc0e3944ec8faafc3","file":"bar","note":"from d1..."}}
|
||||
{"progress-id":"1","percent-progress":"25%","byte-progress":500}
|
||||
{"progress-id":"1","percent-progress":"75%","byte-progress":1500}
|
||||
{"command":"get","key":"SHA256E-s5242880--82cb4363f596cb66e7bc6e4cbfd2bfe8a8b6ac7e6d02557cc0e3944ec8faafc3","file":"bar","note":"from d1...","success":true}
|
||||
|
||||
Makes the consumer's job a bit more complicated, and could also make the
|
||||
implementation in git-annex harder. Is it worth it?
|
||||
"""]]
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
|
|||
[[!comment format=mdwn
|
||||
username="joey"
|
||||
subject="""comment 3"""
|
||||
date="2016-09-08T16:20:27Z"
|
||||
content="""
|
||||
Needing to use file-level locking etc does make the mult-process approach
|
||||
to parallelism more expensive, but only I think by a small amount.
|
||||
|
||||
Yes, there might need to be a switch to enable the json progress output.
|
||||
Although given the un-typed nature of json, consumers should probably be
|
||||
written with a plan in mind for what to do if they encounter something they
|
||||
don't understand. Any comsumer that just skips over unrecognised json
|
||||
objects would not be impacted by adding the progress..
|
||||
|
||||
And here's a way to make the progress json less verbose:
|
||||
|
||||
{"progress-id":"1","action":{"command":"get","key":"SHA256E-s5242880--82cb4363f596cb66e7bc6e4cbfd2bfe8a8b6ac7e6d02557cc0e3944ec8faafc3","file":"bar","note":"from d1..."}}
|
||||
{"progress-id":"1","percent-progress":"25%","byte-progress":500}
|
||||
{"progress-id":"1","percent-progress":"75%","byte-progress":1500}
|
||||
{"command":"get","key":"SHA256E-s5242880--82cb4363f596cb66e7bc6e4cbfd2bfe8a8b6ac7e6d02557cc0e3944ec8faafc3","file":"bar","note":"from d1...","success":true}
|
||||
|
||||
Makes the consumer's job a bit more complicated, and could also make the
|
||||
implementation in git-annex harder. Is it worth it?
|
||||
"""]]
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue