From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: git-viz tool for visualising commit trees Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 16:38:40 +0200 Message-ID: <20050421143840.GA14059@elte.hu> References: <20050421092120.GA20626@elte.hu> <20050421.133136.78712855.oandrieu@nerim.net> <20050421130242.GA5817@elte.hu> <20050421.155519.112619323.oandrieu@nerim.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 21 16:35:26 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DOclC-0002vj-8r for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 16:34:30 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261395AbVDUOiy (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2005 10:38:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261397AbVDUOiy (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2005 10:38:54 -0400 Received: from mx2.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:30353 "EHLO mx2.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261395AbVDUOiv (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2005 10:38:51 -0400 Received: from chiara.elte.hu (chiara.elte.hu [157.181.150.200]) by mx2.elte.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15A8A318B29; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 16:37:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: by chiara.elte.hu (Postfix, from userid 17806) id 555981FC2; Thu, 21 Apr 2005 16:38:43 +0200 (CEST) To: Olivier Andrieu Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050421.155519.112619323.oandrieu@nerim.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-ELTE-SpamVersion: MailScanner 4.31.6-itk1 (ELTE 1.2) SpamAssassin 2.63 ClamAV 0.73 X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-4.9, required 5.9, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -4.90 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamScore: -4 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org * Olivier Andrieu wrote: > Yes, git-viz uses the `dot' program from the graphviz package (it's in > Fedora Extra too I believe). ah - that resolved all issues and i'm now running git-viz without any problems. I just checked how the kernel repository looks like with it, and i'm impressed! The GUI is top-notch, and the whole graph output and navigation is very mature visually. Kudos! a couple of suggestions that are in the 'taste' category: - isnt left-to-right layout the more natural thing instead of top-down (as it aligns with the reading direction)? It's selectable in the preferences, but you might want to make it default. OTOH, top-down creates a more compressed view of the graph. - there doesnt seem to be any performance difference between non-colored and colored rendering - so you might as well want to make 'color by author' (or color by branch) the default coloring, instead of uncolored? - naming the boxes by key is quite meaningless. It would be more informative to see the author's email shortcuts in the boxes. Also, it would be nice to see some simple graphical feedback about the size and scope of a changeset, without having to zoom on it. i guess you know it, and i'm definitely not complaining about prototype code, but rendering is quite slow: drawing the 340 changesets in the current kernel repository takes 15 seconds on a 2 GHz P4. Drawing the full kernel history (63,000 changesets) would take more than 45 minutes on this box. the current rate of kernel development is ~2000 changesets per month, so drawing the kernel history will get 3 seconds slower every day - it will exceed 1 minute in 20 days, so this will become a pressing issue quite soon i suspect. Ingo