Michael J Gruber <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I was wondering whether it would make sense to ship GitBrowser.js with > Git and how much it would take to do so. > > My personal answer to the 1st Q is Yes: instaweb as well as simple > gitweb installs would benefit from a graphical DAG viewer. > > About the required effort I have no clue: I find it difficult to see > through which repo contains current gitweb, current repo.or.cz mods, and > especially the GitBrowser integration bits. Maybe we could ship the > integration bits without the actual GitBrowser if that is more feasible? The integration parts are actually present in gitweb, I think. It is a matter of configuration to enable 'graphiclog' link like in http://repo.or.cz GitBrowser.js is not, I think, the best solution for having graphical history in gitweb, but would do... -- Jakub Narebski 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