4 ms·

I found myself using the "network" section of a work project on GitHub on an almost daily basis. It's basically a prettier git log. I know about git log (and t

I found myself using the "network" section of a work project on GitHub on an almost daily basis. It's basically a prettier git log. I know about git log (and the millions of options it has), but it's ugly as a sin, difficult to just quickly browse, and is just so busy that it's hard (for me at least) to quickly get information on if employee x merged branch y into z or if v has the latest commits from w, etc... So I ended up writing a user script to blow up the small window on the GitHub page to a larger size, and get rid of some stuff that we don't care about and made it a dashboard of sorts. I spent some time one day trying to find something like it, butcame up with pretty much nothing that was easily setup and maintained and that I didn't need to build my own application around.

JetSpiegel 9y ago
Why not gitk? It is basically the same thing, but local. There is also gitg, which also includes primitive commit capabilities and uses the full-fat GNOME widgets, making it pretty.
- Klathmon 9y ago
  Because both of them are basically "git log in a gui". It's the same overly busy UI, the same lack of easily seeable branch names (yes I know this isn't how git works internally, but it's extremely useful), the same vertical layout on our widescreen monitors, and they are still ugly to me (although this is honestly one of the lowest on my list of priorities). I'm looking for something like [0] but with a better UX (Github's version doesn't let you scroll with the mouse wheel for instance), is fast enough to pull up at a glance to quickly see the state of the whole repo, and won't get disabled if the repo has too many forks (and I'm guessing branches, although I've never seen it happen from then alone) like Github's does. It's easy to glance at and see where a branch is (what was merged into it, what it was merged into, etc...), who did the work (in the example it shows in a "tooltip" when you hover over the dot), roughly when the work was done, and what that branch includes. [0] https://imgur.com/tvTp5z8 https://imgur.com/tvTp5z8
chrismorgan 9y ago
Read up on https://zwischenzugs.com/2018/03/26/git-log-the-good-parts/ https://zwischenzugs.com/2018/03/26/git-log-the-good-parts/, it’s good and practical stuff. I recently aliased `git history` to `git log --graph --all --simplify-by-decoration`, and have `glog` as `log --graph` (and so seldom use `log`). If you’re earlier than Git 2.12 or so, you’ll need to add --decorate to get the branch and tag names shown.
- tome 9y ago
  This is amazing, thanks!

JetSpiegel 9y ago

Why not gitk? It is basically the same thing, but local. There is also gitg, which also includes primitive commit capabilities and uses the full-fat GNOME widgets, making it pretty.

Klathmon 9y ago
Because both of them are basically "git log in a gui". It's the same overly busy UI, the same lack of easily seeable branch names (yes I know this isn't how git works internally, but it's extremely useful), the same vertical layout on our widescreen monitors, and they are still ugly to me (although this is honestly one of the lowest on my list of priorities). I'm looking for something like [0] but with a better UX (Github's version doesn't let you scroll with the mouse wheel for instance), is fast enough to pull up at a glance to quickly see the state of the whole repo, and won't get disabled if the repo has too many forks (and I'm guessing branches, although I've never seen it happen from then alone) like Github's does. It's easy to glance at and see where a branch is (what was merged into it, what it was merged into, etc...), who did the work (in the example it shows in a "tooltip" when you hover over the dot), roughly when the work was done, and what that branch includes. [0] https://imgur.com/tvTp5z8 https://imgur.com/tvTp5z8

chrismorgan 9y ago

Read up on https://zwischenzugs.com/2018/03/26/git-log-the-good-parts/ https://zwischenzugs.com/2018/03/26/git-log-the-good-parts/, it’s good and practical stuff. I recently aliased `git history` to `git log --graph --all --simplify-by-decoration`, and have `glog` as `log --graph` (and so seldom use `log`). If you’re earlier than Git 2.12 or so, you’ll need to add --decorate to get the branch and tag names shown.

tome 9y ago
This is amazing, thanks!