FR: Permit Ignorance Of Untracked Files

Problem Description

When working with large repositories containing numerous untracked files, such as build artifacts, it can be challenging to exclude them via .gitignore or similar mechanisms. This can lead to slower performance when using jj operations within the repository, as it processes the existence of these files. To mitigate this issue, users often employ workarounds like status.showuntrackedfiles=no to suppress the costly behavior of considering untracked files.

The Challenge of Untracked Files

Untracked files can significantly impact the performance of jj operations, making it essential to find a solution that balances the need for awareness with the cost of processing these files. The current approach of suppressing untracked files using status.showuntrackedfiles=no may not be sufficient, as it can lead to a lack of visibility into the repository's state. On the other hand, considering untracked files can result in slower performance, making it crucial to have a flexible solution that allows users to opt-in or opt-out of this behavior.

Desired Solution

A desirable solution would be to introduce an option similar to git's status.showuntrackedfiles=no, which would permit users to suppress the consideration of untracked files when using jj operations. This option should be combined with the existing git status command's ability to force the consideration of untracked files using the -unormal flag. By providing a flag that allows users to opt-in or opt-out of considering untracked files, jj can offer a more flexible and efficient experience for users working with large repositories.

Benefits of the Proposed Solution

The proposed solution would offer several benefits, including:

• Improved performance: By allowing users to suppress the consideration of untracked files, jj operations can be significantly faster, especially when working with large repositories.
• Increased flexibility: The introduction of a flag that permits users to opt-in or opt-out of considering untracked files would provide a more flexible experience, catering to the diverse needs of users.
• Better visibility: By offering a way to consider untracked files, users can gain a better understanding of the repository's state, even if it comes at a cost.

Implementation Details

To implement the proposed solution, the following steps could be taken:

1. Introduce a new flag: Add a new flag to jj operations that allows users to suppress the consideration of untracked files. This flag could be similar to git's status.showuntrackedfiles=no.
2. Combine with existing git status command: Ensure that the new flag is compatible with the existing git status command's ability to force the consideration of untracked files using the -unormal flag.
3. Test and refine: Thoroughly test the new flag and refine it as needed to ensure that it provides the desired benefits without introducing any new issues.

Conclusion

Q: What is the current issue with untracked files in jj operations?

A: The current issue is that jj operations process the existence of untracked files, leading to slower performance when working with large repositories containing numerous untracked files.

Q: Why can't we just exclude untracked files via .gitignore or similar mechanisms?

A: Excluding untracked files via .gitignore or similar mechanisms may not be feasible, especially when dealing with a vast number of untracked files. This can make it challenging to maintain a clean and efficient .gitignore file.

Q: What is the proposed solution to address this issue?

A: The proposed solution is to introduce an option similar to git's status.showuntrackedfiles=no, which would permit users to suppress the consideration of untracked files when using jj operations. This option should be combined with the existing git status command's ability to force the consideration of untracked files using the -unormal flag.

Q: How would this solution benefit users?

A: This solution would benefit users in several ways:

• Improved performance: By allowing users to suppress the consideration of untracked files, jj operations can be significantly faster, especially when working with large repositories.
• Increased flexibility: The introduction of a flag that permits users to opt-in or opt-out of considering untracked files would provide a more flexible experience, catering to the diverse needs of users.
• Better visibility: By offering a way to consider untracked files, users can gain a better understanding of the repository's state, even if it comes at a cost.

Q: How would the new flag be implemented?

A: The new flag would be implemented by introducing a new option to jj operations that allows users to suppress the consideration of untracked files. This option would be similar to git's status.showuntrackedfiles=no. The implementation would involve combining this new flag with the existing git status command's ability to force the consideration of untracked files using the -unormal flag.

Q: What are the potential challenges or limitations of this solution?

A: Some potential challenges or limitations of this solution include:

• Additional complexity: Introducing a new flag and combining it with the existing git status command could add complexity to the jj operations.
• Potential for misuse: Users may misuse the new flag, leading to unintended consequences, such as ignoring important files or neglecting to consider untracked files when necessary.

Q: How would the solution be tested and refined?

A: The solution would be thoroughly tested and refined to ensure that it provides the desired benefits without introducing any new issues. This would involve:

• Testing with various scenarios: Testing the new flag with different scenarios, such as large repositories, various file types, and different user preferences.
• Gathering user feedback: Gathering feedback from users to identify potential issues and areas for improvement.
• Refining the implementation: Refining the implementation based on user feedback and testing results to ensure that the solution meets the needs of users.

Q: What is the expected timeline for implementing this solution?

A: The expected timeline for implementing this solution would depend on various factors, including the complexity of the implementation, the availability of resources, and the priority of the feature. However, it is expected that the solution would be implemented within a reasonable timeframe, allowing users to benefit from the improved performance, increased flexibility, and better visibility into the repository's state.