From: "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org>
To: "Roger C. Soares" <rogersoares@intelinet.com.br>
Cc: Robin Rosenberg <robin.rosenberg@dewire.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: faster egit history page and a pure java "gitk"
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2008 01:36:49 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080325053649.GE4759@spearce.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47E8889E.6090403@intelinet.com.br>
"Roger C. Soares" <rogersoares@intelinet.com.br> wrote:
> Shawn O. Pearce escreveu:
> >The history page has been completely replaced.
>
> I have a git.git clone on my eclipse and now egit can open it, cool! :)
Yea, that was my impression too. "Yay, it can open git.git!" :)
> But it wasn't that fast, it took some minutes to finish building the
> whole tree. Also, changing projects (different git repos) makes the cpu
> go very high, and what opened fast the first time takes minutes after...
Hmm. How long does C Git take for "git rev-list HEAD >/dev/null" ?
I have thus far only tuned the lower level machinary, and there
may still be tuning left there, but I _really_ have not tried to
tune the plotting portion yet.
I did push something out a few minutes ago (b66eae Limit the number
of UI refreshes ...) that may help improve performance on larger
histories.
Another thing is how many pack files/loose objects do you have?
The loose objects are harder to access, and jgit is currently
lacking some of the pack search tricks that C Git uses to get
good performance. As such all of my testing has been working on
a fully packed repository that has exactly one packfile in it,
with no alternates.
Its _almost_ acceptable to me. We can still do better, but there's
a point at which we just can't get past. We probably can't beat
rev-list, but I think we should be able to beat gitk almost always.
In the simple fully packed case "jgit glog" beats gitk at opening
the full graph and displaying it.
> When reading the email I thought the new history page would have the
> same features from the current, but it doesn't. It looks promissing thought.
Nope. Sorry. Its basically a rewrite.
> My first impression is that I like the current way of showing files in
> the strutucture compare better.
I actually prefer the individual files in the right pane, like gitk
does, as I like to browse up and down sometimes looking at changes.
Maybe we can make it an option to show that right side panel,
and give a button (or IOpenListener on the graph table?) to let
you open the whole commit in the structure compare view.
> In the future I would like the option to
> make it open on the left pane (where package explorer is) and have the
> options to collapse/expand directories, present in flat/hierarchical
> modes, have the fast view, etc.
Oooh. Sounds fun.
> Comments now can't be automatically wrapped.
Oversight/planned loss of feature. I'm a strong believer of showing
the commit message *exactly* as recorded, which means don't do
line wrapping of it. Things like character encoding translation
and indenting the left side 2-4 spaces to keep it unambiguous from
headers is fine when showing it to a human, but otherwise it should
match what the user wrote.
I forgot to offer a wrap option. If we do enable line wrapping I
think we should give the user a way to toggle it on/off for the
message area viewer so that if line wrapping is enabled and its
borking the current message (e.g. a nice pretty ASCII diagram)
you can disable it.
> I actually prefer to leave
> wrapping to the computer, I don't like having to manually fix line
> lenghts when amending a comment, I think eclipse should do it. Also,
> currently, the history page usually has little space allocated for it
> and currently the first lines of the comment are visible. In the new
> page I have to scroll to see the comment when the history page is not
> maximized.
Yea, I started to notice that myself today. The area isn't quite
wide enough, and I was using Eclipse on a very high resolution CRT
and it was taking up a good 80% of the display. Most users can't
sanely devote the area I did to the History view, and it was still
not wide enough for some git.git messages.
Thanks for the feedback. Obviously its still got a lot of areas
for improvements.
--
Shawn.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-25 5:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-24 9:27 faster egit history page and a pure java "gitk" Shawn O. Pearce
2008-03-24 13:33 ` Roger C. Soares
2008-03-24 14:10 ` Robin Rosenberg
2008-03-25 4:43 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2008-03-25 12:33 ` Roger C. Soares
2008-03-24 14:06 ` Robin Rosenberg
2008-03-25 5:10 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2008-03-24 14:31 ` faster egit history page and a pure java "gitk" so Robin Rosenberg
2008-03-25 4:48 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2008-03-25 5:07 ` faster egit history page and a pure java "gitk" Roger C. Soares
2008-03-25 5:36 ` Shawn O. Pearce [this message]
2008-03-25 8:09 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2008-03-25 13:46 ` Roger C. Soares
2008-03-25 19:48 ` Robin Rosenberg
2008-03-26 1:37 ` Roger C. Soares
2008-03-26 4:52 ` Shawn O. Pearce
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080325053649.GE4759@spearce.org \
--to=spearce@spearce.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=robin.rosenberg@dewire.com \
--cc=rogersoares@intelinet.com.br \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.