|
|
|
|
|
by tenfingers
3955 days ago
|
|
In my mind the default git log graph (and most other git UIs) are very poor at rendering the graph itself. Somehow, even a moderately simple repository which has been heavily co-authored will look like garbage; even though there _are_ two distinct mainlines that you can follow. One of the best visualizations for revision control, IMHO, is fossil's timeline view: https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/timeline?y=ci It's clear, compact, and tries to maintain different lineages as straight lines. git tools, by contrast, just shift everything on right. Not even github's network view is really usable, since the network simplification they perform destroys the locality of the changes. |
|
At first I didn't like the idea of including a web interface and wiki, but the more I thought about it, the more I liked it. Having a change log for the wiki would be helpful, and I'm assuming it's zero cost if you don't use it.
Including an integrated bug tracking seems like an ingenious idea, though. Any idea how well it works out on real projects?