From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] gitweb: Show trailing slash when listing tree entry in tree listing Date: Mon, 09 Oct 2006 22:46:21 -0700 Message-ID: <7vslhw7mfm.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7vy7ro7o3g.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20061010053841.42852.qmail@web31815.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 10 07:46:45 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GXARe-0001se-3a for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 07:46:27 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964995AbWJJFqX (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:46:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964998AbWJJFqX (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:46:23 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao12.cox.net ([68.230.241.27]:33447 "EHLO fed1rmmtao12.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964995AbWJJFqX (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:46:23 -0400 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao12.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20061010054622.CQMH26416.fed1rmmtao12.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:46:22 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id YVmR1V0031kojtg0000000 Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:46:25 -0400 To: ltuikov@yahoo.com In-Reply-To: <20061010053841.42852.qmail@web31815.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (Luben Tuikov's message of "Mon, 9 Oct 2006 22:38:41 -0700 (PDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Luben Tuikov writes: > --- Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Having said that, I agree to the point you are trying to make >> here. It was a mistake to remove blob/tree links from the view >> that lists pathnames. >> >> If we did not have any obviously clickable links on the right >> hand side it might have been a different story, but when given >> UNIXy permission bits, pathname and blame/history/raw links, >> nobody would think of clicking on the pathname itself to grab >> its contents. The blame link would give you the same > > I've seen the exact opposite. > > BTW, what is our standard here? People with zero-computer > exposure? With some? With high? > > Certainly, if I didn't know what a folder/directory/tree is, > and what a file is and I was told to "get" that file, the first > thing I'd do when I see it on the screen would be to "put my pointer > over the file and press the action button". I would agree with that if we did not have anything on the right hand side that attracts eye and hand to tempt clicking. And that would be true for all levels of users. If we replaced UNIXy mode bits with folder/file/symlink icons, people might be tempted to click on them as well.