From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Stephen R. van den Berg" Subject: Repository from hell (gitk stresstest) Date: Sun, 4 May 2008 15:36:49 +0200 Message-ID: <20080504133649.GA31370@cuci.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun May 04 15:38:08 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JsePl-0006eD-H0 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 04 May 2008 15:38:05 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752270AbYEDNgv (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 May 2008 09:36:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753280AbYEDNgv (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 May 2008 09:36:51 -0400 Received: from aristoteles.cuci.nl ([212.125.128.18]:42975 "EHLO aristoteles.cuci.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752270AbYEDNgu (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 May 2008 09:36:50 -0400 Received: by aristoteles.cuci.nl (Postfix, from userid 500) id 2D1855461; Sun, 4 May 2008 15:36:49 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Just in case someone wants to see how gitk performs on a tree with 8 main branches and littered with backports (single-patch-cross-merges between branches), have a look at: git://git.cuci.nl/pike Start gitk with --all to view it in full glory (of course). Some notes: - The branches are interconnected through their first-parents as follows: v0 --o--o--o--o--o--o--o-------- 7.7 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ o------ 7.6 \ \ \ \ \ o-------- 7.4 \ \ \ \ o-------- 7.2 \ \ \ o-------- 7.0 \ \ \ \ \ o------ nt-tools \ o-------- 0.6 o--------- 0.5 - As one can see, gitk deals with the numerous backports just fine, except that it uses a bit (too) much screen realestate perhaps at times. - I find the Branches, Follows and Precedes display of gitk confusing on occasion, when inside this entanglement of backports. Most notably, IMO: + It should only show the main branch you're on (i.e. when determining the branch, please use the first-parent information only, and disregard any parents that come from merges). + The "Follows" and "Precedes" list might look cleaner when displaying only the tags which are on the same main branch the current commit is part of. -- Sincerely, srb@cuci.nl Stephen R. van den Berg.