4 ms·

> or any other commit heatmap for that matter The problem with heatmaps and how they are currently used by popular tools, is they only provide novelty metrics.

by sdesol 10y ago

> or any other commit heatmap for that matter The problem with heatmaps and how they are currently used by popular tools, is they only provide novelty metrics. That is, metrics that are interesting to look at and nothing more. Commit heatmaps are actually quite useful for answering a lot of questions, if used properly. Here's an example, that shows how they can be used to help you navigate to the first commit. https://gitsense.com/first-commit.mp4 https://gitsense.com/first-commit.mp4 They can be used to provide visual aid, to show how frequently certain files are modified. https://gitsense.com/track-files.mp4 https://gitsense.com/track-files.mp4

wingerlang 10y ago
The second example is quite nice, I think. But the first one will only work for the first commit, you can't really pinpoint any other one. Using a heatmap for that is probably even overkill.
- sdesol 10y ago
  > you can't really pinpoint any other one Yeah the heatmap only really shines when it's sparse, as the noise can be too much. The heatmap is intended to be used as a secondary visual aid. What I normally recommend, is for people to use the line chart first, to help select larger swaths of time. And if you need to, use the heatmap to help you drill further. Below is an example of what I mean. https://gitsense.com/search.mp4 https://gitsense.com/search.mp4 There are still a lot of ways to improve the heatmap by using animation and other tricks, but I don't have the time to experiment with these ideas.
lolsal 10y ago
This is pretty interesting, but I don't know how useful it would be for me. Part of why I feel that way would be just because I don't have those use cases. I guess part of it is I don't use GitHub as a UI to my repos either. When I want to find this information out I go exploring with log/blame.
- sdesol 10y ago
  The heatmaps and the graphs in general, or more to help you orient yourself, when having to deal with a lot of information. They make it very easy to view activity across multiple files, branches and repos at once. For me personally, I mainly stick with the "Changes tree", which I prefer to use over log/blame. I'm particular not a fan of using blame, if I need to trace the history for a file, since it can get disorienting. I use what I've dubbed as rapid diffing, which makes it easier to see how a file evolved. Here's an example. https://gitsense.com/rapid-diffing.mp4 https://gitsense.com/rapid-diffing.mp4

by sdesol 10y ago

wingerlang 10y ago

The second example is quite nice, I think. But the first one will only work for the first commit, you can't really pinpoint any other one. Using a heatmap for that is probably even overkill.

sdesol 10y ago
> you can't really pinpoint any other one Yeah the heatmap only really shines when it's sparse, as the noise can be too much. The heatmap is intended to be used as a secondary visual aid. What I normally recommend, is for people to use the line chart first, to help select larger swaths of time. And if you need to, use the heatmap to help you drill further. Below is an example of what I mean. https://gitsense.com/search.mp4 https://gitsense.com/search.mp4 There are still a lot of ways to improve the heatmap by using animation and other tricks, but I don't have the time to experiment with these ideas.

lolsal 10y ago

This is pretty interesting, but I don't know how useful it would be for me. Part of why I feel that way would be just because I don't have those use cases. I guess part of it is I don't use GitHub as a UI to my repos either. When I want to find this information out I go exploring with log/blame.

sdesol 10y ago
The heatmaps and the graphs in general, or more to help you orient yourself, when having to deal with a lot of information. They make it very easy to view activity across multiple files, branches and repos at once. For me personally, I mainly stick with the "Changes tree", which I prefer to use over log/blame. I'm particular not a fan of using blame, if I need to trace the history for a file, since it can get disorienting. I use what I've dubbed as rapid diffing, which makes it easier to see how a file evolved. Here's an example. https://gitsense.com/rapid-diffing.mp4 https://gitsense.com/rapid-diffing.mp4