Luben Tuikov wrote: >> It probably is wise to resurrect those "redundant" links. > > If someone does this, can they also remove the now "other" > redundant link? (the link at the pathname itself) A simple > code analyzer would show the duplicate code in gitweb. Easy, easy now. I'd rather add some more "hidden" links, but for each hidden link (which are convenience only, to have larger are to click, or to have closer area to click) I'd like to have clearly marked link (marked as a link, i.e. using default link style; and with link text denoting _kind_ of link) which leads to the same contents. For example on project list page I would made also project description (and not only project name) clickable, leading tp project summary. Making project name direct link wouldn't work for sites like kernel.org with long (hierarchical) project names like linux/kernel/git/wim/linux-2.6-watchdog-experimental.git And for other sites project name is/can be bit on the short side. But we agreed (I guess) to disagree on the whole redundancy in user interface issue (although I agree on the issue of reducing clutter). BTW. we can reduce redundancy in the code without need for removing "alternate entry points" in interface, I think. -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html