On 05/01/2015 01:02 AM, Jonas Bernoulli wrote: >> But in reality, in mature projects contiguous changes are often only 1-2 >> lines long, making the interspersed annotation a major distraction (that >> is, the source is almost unreadable). > > On magit's next branch you can press `t' to only separate chunks > with thin lines instead of headings. (Then press `RET' to see the > full information about the commit that added the lines at point).
Good to know, but only marginally better. >> It would be nice to have the same kind of output directly in magit. >> Does anybody else share the same view? > > I intend to eventually look at how other tools do it and then come > up with a synthesis. In the past I have looked at various emacs > blame interfaces and found all of them to be insufficient (including > magit-blame). Some thoughts here if you want some more pointers. Even though I don't use it since years, I never had a better experience compared to p4v's file blame/history tool (a real kudos to Perforce here). I rarely use GUI tools, but p4v made a *real* compelling argument. I consider current git frontends to be mostly garbage by comparison, and the devil is in the fine details of the UI. In git land, I still find myself using 'tig' browse/tree/log and blame modes too much (I spawn a terminal instead of staying in emacs). It's very fast and generally well thought off, although for strictly browsing diffs and files it cannot compete to staying in emacs. The blame mode is very good for visualization, although it's not excellent when it comes to version switching (that is, you can go to the parent commit, but the current line is not matched across versions, and you cannot forward). I think I said everything I had in mind about vc-annotate. In emacs, I use git-timemachine occasionally. However, like for tig, it also lacks same-line alignment when switching through versions, which makes it quite annoying for the use I had in mind. What about github's blame mode? I think it's decent, but could be better. Again, the use color for the age in that thin strip. Not really useful, but fortunately doesn't waste space. Color-banding the background color of the left annotation would have been superior and way more visible. I like the idea of having the title of the commit in there, but it's not going to work for emacs. author/date/short commit id are more useful and compact. Trac also fails at coloring, using commit age. But click on a commit version/hash, and the lines from the same commit are highlighted. *Very* useful. They also popup the commit log, which eats too much space unfortunately. If it was done in a header/footer instead I would have loved it. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "magit" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
