Re: [PATCH 00/13] gitk: tweak rendering of remote-tracking references

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2016-12-20 07:05 PM, Michael Haggerty wrote:
On 12/20/2016 04:01 PM, Marc Branchaud wrote:
On 2016-12-19 11:44 AM, Michael Haggerty wrote:
This patch series changes a bunch of details about how remote-tracking
references are rendered in the commit list of gitk:

Thanks for this!  I like the new, compact look very much!

That said, I remember when I was a new git user and I leaned heavily on
gitk to understand how references worked.  It was particularly
illuminating to see the remote references distinctly labeled, and the
fact that they were "remotes/origin/foo" gave me an Aha! moment where I
came to understand that the refs hierarchy is more flexible than just
the conventions coded into git itself.  I eventually felt free to create
my own, private ref hierarchies.

I am in no way opposed to this series.  I just wanted to point out that
there was some utility in those labels.  It makes me think that it might
be worthwhile for gitk to have a "raw-refs" mode, that shows the full
"refs/foo/bar/baz" paths of all the heads, tags, and whatever else.  It
could be a useful teaching tool for git.

Yes, I understand that the longer names might be useful for beginners,
and the full names even more so. However, I think once a user has that
"aha!" moment, the space wasted on all the redundant words is a real
impediment to gitk's usability. It is common to have a few references on
a single commit (especially if you pull from multiple remotes), in which
case the summary line is completely invisible (and therefore its context
menu is unreachable). I don't like the idea of dumbing down the UI
permanently based on what users need at the very beginning of their Git
usage.

I agree.

Would it be possible to use the short names in the UI but to add the
full names to a tooltip or to the context menu?

I don't know -- my Tk-fu is weak.

* Omit the "remote/" prefix on normal remote-tracking references. They

If you re-roll, s:remote/:remotes/:.

Thanks.

  are already distinguished via their two-tone rendering and (usually)
  longer names, and this change saves a lot of visual clutter and
  horizontal space.

* Render remote-tracking references that have more than the usual
  three slashes like

      origin/foo/bar
      ^^^^^^^

  rather than

      origin/foo/bar (formerly remotes/origin/foo/bar)
      ^^^^^^^^^^^              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

  , where the indicated part is the prefix that is rendered in a
  different color. Usually, such a reference represents a remote
  branch that contains a slash in its name, so the new split more
  accurately portrays the separation between remote name and remote
  branch name.

*Love* this change!  :)

* Introduce a separate constant to specify the background color used
  for the branch name part of remote-tracking references, to allow it
  to differ from the color used for local branches (which by default
  is bright green).

* Change the default background colors for remote-tracking branches to
  light brown and brown (formerly they were pale orange and bright
  green).

Please don't change the remotebgcolor default.

Also, perhaps the default remoterefbgcolor should be
    set remoterefbgcolor $headbgcolor
?

I say this because when I applied the series, without the last patch, I
was miffed that the remote/ref colour had changed.

This is a one-time inconvenience that gitk developers will experience. I
doubt that users jump backwards and forwards in gitk versions very often.

In what way do you mean it's restricted to gitk developers?

Patch 12 introduces remoterefbgcolor, with a specific default value. Prior to that, the "ref part" of remote refs was rendered with headbgcolor. Users who changed their headbgcolor are used to seeing the "ref part" of remote refs in the same color as their local heads. Applying patch 12 changes the "ref part" color of remote refs, for such users.

All I'm saying is that make the remoterefbgcolor default be $headbgcolor avoids this.

But, honestly, I don't feel strongly about it.

		M.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]