[merge] don't use 'dots' progress output on non-interactive runs

[Ian Clatworthy]

Martin Pool wrote:
> On 7/12/07, Aaron Bentley <aaron.bentley at utoronto.ca> wrote:
>> Aaron Bentley has voted +0.
>> Status is now: Waiting
>> Comment:
>> I don't think renaming DummyProgress is a good idea.  Not all our
>> progress indicators are bars, and even our default progress bar can be
>> configured as a spinner instead.
> 
> It's true that it's not always bar, but almost every other class is
> called 'ProgressBar', including the superclass and the factory that
> creates them.  That's not quite true though - there is also
> ChildProgress.
> 
> Anyhow it was just an incidental cleanup - my main thing was to fix
> the broken window of commit now being so noisy.  I can revert that if
> you like.
> 

I can see Aaron's point. If we wanted to rename, DummyProgressIndicator
might be better than DummyProgressBar. But then we'd have some Bars and
some Indicators so we've simply traded one inconsistency problem for
another. :-(

I'd leave DummyProgress as DummyProgress and resubmit. We can get the
important bit through then without blocking on a name change (that is
arguably a little better but not without its faults).

Ian C.