From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Shoemaker Subject: Re: [PATCH gitweb] Visually indicating patch size with horizontal bars Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2005 22:38:33 -0400 Message-ID: <20051028023833.GA19939@pe.Belkin> References: <20051027203945.GC1622@pe.Belkin> <20051028015642.GA31822@vrfy.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Oct 28 04:39:40 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EVK8c-000728-QO for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 28 Oct 2005 04:38:39 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965058AbVJ1Cif (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2005 22:38:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965059AbVJ1Cif (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2005 22:38:35 -0400 Received: from eastrmmtao06.cox.net ([68.230.240.33]:7613 "EHLO eastrmmtao06.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965058AbVJ1Cif (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2005 22:38:35 -0400 Received: from localhost ([24.250.31.7]) by eastrmmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20051028023748.XIGR21663.eastrmmtao06.cox.net@localhost>; Thu, 27 Oct 2005 22:37:48 -0400 Received: from chris by localhost with local (Exim 4.43) id 1EVK8Y-0005Lg-0J; Thu, 27 Oct 2005 22:38:34 -0400 To: Kay Sievers Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051028015642.GA31822@vrfy.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Oct 28, 2005 at 03:56:42AM +0200, Kay Sievers wrote: > On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 04:39:45PM -0400, Chris Shoemaker wrote: > > > > I really like gitweb (thanks Kay!), but I thought it would be nice to > > have a visual indication of patch size. I found this helpful when > > scanning though the shortlogs. > > This looks nice, but if the patch size tells you something important, > your commit subjects are probably too short or wrong. :) Yeah, some people write lousy commit subjects. But me? Nooo, /never/. :) > You may try to use CSS instead of an embedded picture to draw the bar, > just like the RSS logo in the footer, which is simple CSS rendered in the > browser. I'll look into that, but the cost wasn't in the image; it was in the width calculation. Here's a side-by-side comparison. Open two browser tabs and flip between them: http://www.codesifter.com/cgi-bin/gitweb-difftreeP.cgi?p=git.git;a=shortlog http://www.codesifter.com/cgi-bin/gitweb-difftreeNames.cgi?p=git.git;a=shortlog I've used a project you all are familar with, and that has more than two files. The first page uses 'git-diff-tree -p $hash|wc -l'. The second page uses 'git-diff-tree -r --name-only|wc -l'. (Oh and I have a merge indicator now.) How do they compare for showing damage-potential? I think they both do a reasonable job. I think the full patch diff is a bit better, but it does cost. -chris