Re: Why doesn't gitk highlight commit references from git-describe?
- From
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
- Date
- Apr 13, 2016, 21:27 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAGZ79kZVC0FxUN45KgLh-2tEK2=j2-yyTajYOc=s-LECgx+yqQ@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <nemal5$mb$1@ger.gmane.org>
On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 1:36 PM, Stephen Kelly <steveire@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 6 quoted lines
> Hi, > > If I look at git commit 89ea90351dd32fbe384d0cf844640a9c55606f3b in gitk, it > does not linkify the v1.6.0-rc0~120^2 in the commit message. > > Is there any reason for that, or can gitk be changed?
Sure it can be changed. Go for it.
I think it is hard though. So for example it is easy to spot sha1s and link them (see a6ee883b8e as an example picking up ebef7e5 as a link.)
How would you know(/code) that v1.6.0-rc0~120^2 is a text worth linking? "v1.6.0-rc0" is a custom string as that is how we name tags in this project. It can follow any convention in other projects.
Maybe a first approximation is if there is a `~` followed by numbers or a ^ character, inspect the whole thing if it is a reference into the history?
(Special case for git.git: Sometimes in a discussion you want to explain stuff and may use HEAD^ or such to demonstrate the use case. Other projects would not use that as much in descriptive text I would assume. So we'd need to make sure changing refs (i.e. branches, symbolic refs such as HEAD, FETCH_HEAD) are not considered worth linkifying.)
Thanks, Stefan
Show 10 quoted lines
> > Thanks, > > Steve. > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html