Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Theodore Tso wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 08:24:52AM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > >> Anyway, all of these issues makes me suspect that the proper blame > >> interface is to basically *hide* the blame almost entirely, in order to > >> make the important parts much more visible, and in order to encourage > >> people to start looking for the piece of code that they are actually > >> interested in. > > > > One approach which might work is where you hover your mouse over a > > line, and it pops up a tiny window with the blame information if the > > mouse remains stationary for more than a second or two. > > > > Another thing which would be really useful is where the lines that > > have been changed in the last n commits (where n is probably between > > 3-5) are highlighted using different colors. That way you can see > > what was changed recently, which is often what you are most interested > > in. (As in, what changed recently that might have caused this file to > > get all screwed up?) > > It would be also nice to have window split into two, and for example > have at bottom details of the commit which changed current line, like > author, description, date, how many commits ago, branch name (e.g. taken > from commit message if it was merged), perhaps also patch... These are some really good ideas. I knew that if I made pretty technicolor crap available, people would tell me what they really needed. :-) I'll like steal them (er, uhm, implement them) in git-gui in the next day or so. The current blame UI was sort of a prototype. Once I tossed the original filename and original line number into that thing it started to become pretty obvious its just too cluttered. But at that point I wanted pretty colors, and uh, it was late... :-) -- Shawn. - 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