Re: no luck with colors for branch names in gitk yet

From: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Date: Feb 5, 2016, 23:28 UTC
Message-ID: <20160205232849.GJ29880@serenity.lan>
In-Reply-To: <CAC4O8c81h-JEGN2mS=SgUnBQM+A-RojDBOY65f=Jmubo6CZCwA@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 01:29:26PM -0900, Britton Kerin wrote:

Show 23 quoted lines

> On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 12:25 PM, Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org> wrote:
> > From: "Britton Kerin" <britton.kerin@gmail.com>
> >>
> >> Someone suggested using color.branch.upstream, I tried like this and
> >> variants
> >>
> >> [color "branch"]
> >>  local = red bold
> >>  upstream = red bold
> >>
> >> Doesn't seem to matter what I put in for upstream, including invalid
> >> colors, gitk just ignores it and does the dark green for local
> >> branches
> >> --
> >
> > Alternate, try
> > https://github.com/oumu/mintty-color-schemes/blob/master/base16-mintty/base16-default.minttyrc
> > (or any of the other colour schemes) and copy them into your .minttyrc file
> > (works for me on g4w : git version 2.7.0.windows.1 )
> 
> I'm on linux so I think mintty is not an option.  Also, I'm a little
> surprised in affects the rendering of branch tags in gitk, I would
> have thought that would be an X or window system thing.

I think Philip missed that you were talking about gitk. It seems that the problem comes from updating to Tcl/Tk 7.6, which makes green darker as described in commit 66db14c (gitk: Color name update, 2015-10-25) and by TIP #403 [1].

However, it seems that gitk won't actually use the updated colour if you have an existing ~/.gitk file. You can just replace "green" with "lime" in that file to get the new defaults, but I wonder if we should force that for users who already have the previous defaults saved.

[1] http://www.tcl.tk/cgi-bin/tct/tip/403.html