Skip to content

"Checking out files" not covered by operation names in RemoteProgress #330

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
phaase opened this issue Jul 28, 2015 · 1 comment · Fixed by #368
Closed

"Checking out files" not covered by operation names in RemoteProgress #330

phaase opened this issue Jul 28, 2015 · 1 comment · Fixed by #368

Comments

@phaase
Copy link

phaase commented Jul 28, 2015

When cloning a repository the following message is printed to stderr repeatedly:
"Operation name u'Checking out files' unknown - skipping line 'Checking out files: 1% (216/11210)'".

  1. Does it makes sense to add the operation 'Checking out files' to the list of operations in the RemoteProgress._parse_progess_line()? (see https://github.com/gitpython-developers/GitPython/blob/master/git/util.py#L162)
  2. Shouldn't the error logged by using the logging mechanism and not printed to stderr directly? (https://github.com/gitpython-developers/GitPython/blob/master/git/util.py#L242)

(Environment: Windows 7, Python 2.7.10, GitPython 1.0.1)

@phaase phaase changed the title Checking out files not covered by operation names in RemoteProgress "Checking out files" not covered by operation names in RemoteProgress Jul 28, 2015
@Byron Byron closed this as completed in c58887a Jul 28, 2015
@Byron Byron added this to the v1.0.2 - Fixes milestone Jul 28, 2015
@Byron
Copy link
Member

Byron commented Jul 28, 2015

Thanks for posting this issue !

As a quick-fix the respective line was removed.

  • About 1) - It seems like a good thing to do
  • About 2) - I'd agree to that too !

If you like you could submit a PR with the changes. They should be easy to implement - your questions and code-links show that you are nearly there already.
What do you think ?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants