On Fri, 24 Nov 2017 15:35:55 +0100, Richard Hipp <d...@sqlite.org> wrote:
Which is better? A: https://www.fossil-scm.org/a/timeline B: https://www.fossil-scm.org/b/timeline Also: A: https://www.fossil-scm.org/a/finfo?name=src/search.c B: https://www.fossil-scm.org/b/finfo?name=src/search.c Surf about from any of the links above for additional views. The change here is to emphasis the check-in comment and de-emphasize the links to the check-in details and other information. In the recent HN discussion of Fossil (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15752725) some comments were sharply critical of the timeline display in Fossil. While I think those comments were overly dramatic, they did bring up the point that the check-in comment is probably the most important feature and should be more prominent. This A/B comparison is my attempt to make them so. Further suggestions and/or comments are welcomed.
in my view, variant B might be preferable somewhat (for the GUI -- but leaving the timeline output in the terminal as is...). but choosing some pale color shades (or alpha?) makes the text difficult to read. I would prefer a smaller font instead, leaving the colors untouched.
personally, I rather like the tidiness of the timeline graph available in mercurial via `hg serve' which beyond the checkin message hides everything except time of checkin, branch name, and user (and uses a distinctly smaller font size for the latter info). in effect one mostly notices the checkin message easily. so one might think about doing something similar (remove hash display and link the commit message itself to the 'chekin' page)?
just an idea.... -- Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
