From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 20:29:15 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] gitweb: New improved patchset view
Message-ID: <200610292129.15372.jnareb@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20061029195554.77410.qmail@web31813.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Luben Tuikov wrote:
> --- Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > A couple of questions regarding new patchset/diff look for gitweb.
> > Currently patch starts with "git diff" header
> > 
> >   diff --git a/file1 b/file2
> > 
> > then we have a couple of extended header lines
> > 
> >   old|new|deleted file|new file mode <mode>
> >   copy|rename from|to <path>
> >   (dis)?similarity index <percent>
> >   index <hash>..<hash> [<mode>]
> > 
> > then we have two-line from-file/to-file header
> 
> First revert back to monospace in the commit message.
> As I mentioned in that other email, where the person
> didn't CC you and thus so I didn't, see commit 
> 4b7ce6e2d6ba088da50de1df38b040ea2c0b8f18.

This regression was caused by the not-accepted (I think) patch
"gitweb: Slight visual improvements to commitdiff view",
and is not caused by _this_ patch.

I'll redo abovementioned patch correctly later.

> Can you please hyperlink what you had intended to
> quote?  I.e. filenames which can lead the user browsing to a
> state (pre-rename, post-rename, etc).  Thanks.

I don't understand this comment. The above is pre-changes git-diff
patch output. The changes are/were mentioned below.

> > 
> >   --- a/file1
> >   +++ b/file2
> > 
> > then patch itself.
> > 
> > 
> > 1. Which parts to convert to hyperlinks, and which to do not? Which
> >    links have visible and which hidden (underline on mouseover, the same
> >    color as neighbouring text)?
> 
> I think the current state of your patch is good, sans the comments
> received so far: monospace, that bug in the index links, etc.
> Lets get that in, and then you can RFC another improvement on top of this.

O.K. I send the corrected version (as "take 2") in a while.

-- 
Jakub Narebski