From: Andrew Ardill <andrew.ardill@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 01:54:09 GMT
Subject: Re: [wishlist] support git flow-like view
Message-ID: <CAH5451nsOE+VkrC7YaSEWYcUd5q2vMze5QPoVGWY8Q+T=nSvww@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <201211202113.44459.perezmeyer@gmail.com>

On 21 November 2012 11:13, Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
<perezmeyer@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...
> Well, two ideas come to my mind:
>
> - detect when using git flow (.git/config contains [gitflow "some_branch"]
> entries).

I guess this part is just so the next part can be done automatically?

> - Show "swim-lane"-like graphs, including branches that may not be present,
> but where there (release branches often are created and merged back, for
> example)

I think this could be useful in general, however it might struggle
with already merged branches. I may be mistaken here, however I think
in general there is no way to specify which commits belonged to a
certain branch after they have been merged, as branch information is
not kept in the commit object. There may be some exceptions that make
it feasible at times, but a general solution would be to show any
merged branches as part of the same swim-lane, as per current
behaviour, but to have separate branch heads in different swim-lanes.
This would be a nice feature, and is similar to the behaviour in, for
example, Atlassian's Fisheye repository viewer and the GitHub network
view.

Regards,

Andrew Ardill