FR: make log graph play well with oneline templates
With more or less the default template --
@ zn avamsi 15 seconds ago d8
│ (empty) (no description set)
o r avamsi 15 seconds ago 8
│ (empty) test3
│ o ur avamsi 34 seconds ago d1
├─╯ (empty) test2
o uu avamsi 37 seconds ago e
│ (empty) test1
o zz 53 years ago 00
(empty) (no description set)
With a oneline template I'm experimenting with --
@ d8 | (empty) (no description set) | zn
o 8 | (empty) test3 | r
│ o d1 | (empty) test2 | ur
├─╯
o e | (empty) test1 | uu
o 00 | (empty) (no description set) | zz
- Adjacent changes should be connected (maybe users could replace
owith├─oor something?). - Branch connector shouldn't waste a whole line (like with
d1in this example).
I imagine 2 might be a bit more involved given it might require changes in the graph rendering code to not use another line and not just the connector (maybe ├─o again instead of ├─╯).
Let's say the graph initially looked like this instead:
@ zn avamsi 15 seconds ago d8
│ (empty) (no description set)
│ o ur avamsi 34 seconds ago d1
| | (empty) test2
o | r avamsi 15 seconds ago 8
│ | (empty) test3
├─╯
o uu avamsi 37 seconds ago e
│ (empty) test1
o zz 53 years ago 00
(empty) (no description set)
Then we can't simply replace the o by ├─o for commit r because there's not enough room. We could possibly use just ├o. Either way, however, I think that makes it look like it's not an ancestor of commit zn. So unless we find a unicode character that's a vertical line with a circle (or other symbol) on it, I think it will be misleading.
I don't think I would mind your suggestion 2, however.
Either way, however, I think that makes it look like it's not an ancestor of commit
zn.
Good point, sorry I didn't think of that -- of course, we could keep indenting child commits (now that I think of it, I think that's what Fig tree used to do -- and probably still does but I wouldn't know 😅) but that's not ideal.
#242 (and probably #1036) are relevant for the room issue (as you already know, but linking for posterity).
It all looks like gobbledygook to me, especially since the o is part of the range for the reverse alphabet IDs.
Is everything below @ an ancestor of it? Is there a flag to show @ last?
It all looks like gobbledygook to me, especially since the o is part of the range for the reverse alphabet IDs.
We could change to some other symbol. I sent https://github.com/martinvonz/jj/pull/1359 to change to ●. Please comment on that PR if you have a different preference.
Is everything below @ an ancestor of it? Is there a flag to show @ last?
Yes, --reversed.