Re: More qgit defects
- From
- Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org>
- Date
- May 1, 2006, 02:20 UTC
- Message-ID
- <1146450035.7879.26.camel@dv>
- In-Reply-To
- <e5bfff550604300313n5ebe84f7nf42c88789efe1@mail.gmail.com>
Hello, Marco!
On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 12:13 +0200, Marco Costalba wrote:
Show 6 quoted lines
> Throwing in the tabs is a *very* big change, but, just to discuss....I > agree on the note that in qgit we have three different approaches: > fixed frames (revisions, file tree, affected files), detachable frames > (patch) and separate windows (annotations). > > This is a bit strange and could give an odd GUI feeling.
Agreed.
> I like the tab idea because it's clear and simple and fixes the 'many > approaches' problem.
I'm glad you liked my idea! And thank you for copying to the list. qgit is meant for most git users, and they should have their voices heard.
Show 6 quoted lines
> What I would suggest is, at least at first step, > do not change the main view and have only three tabs: > > Tab1: Main view with revisions, file tree (hide able), affected files. > Tab2: Patch view with patch stat and diffs > Tab3: File history + file content/annotation view
Absolutely. It's easier to make changes incrementally than to rewrite everything and hunt bugs for months. This change alone would make it easier to work with qgit.
Once qgit can deal with more than one patch view and more than one file view, this would provide the fix for qgit's "jumpiness". Mere selection of objects in listboxes shouldn't affect other tabs.
> In other words just put the frames/windows as are now in browse able > tabs. In this way main view still gives a good amount of information > without requiring changing the tab and the tabs are reserved for 'big > space' needed infos only.
That would be great. I'm eagerly waiting for new commits to test :-)
-- Regards, Pavel Roskin