Re: [Monotone-devel] monotone-viz changes...

[Olivier Andrieu]

 Daniel Carosone [Thursday 12 October 2006] :
 >
 > Firstly, it's great to see more development on -viz, it's a *really*
 > useful tool. 
 > 
 > On Thu, Oct 12, 2006 at 02:21:19AM +0200, Olivier Andrieu wrote:
 > >  Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker [Wednesday 11 October 2006] :
 > >  >
 > >  > I'm noticing that the latest monotone-viz doesn't show all
 > >  > propagates from the branch you're looking at.  Is that on
 > >  > purpose?
 > > 
 > > Ah, yes it is. I find that too many propagates nodes "disrupt"
 > > the graph produced by graphviz, making the result not so legible.
 > >
 > > Current monotone-viz only displays nodes that start a new branch
 > > or that "finish" a branch (e.g. the final propagate from a side
 > > branch to the main branch).
 > 
 > I haven't had a chance to look; I presume it still shows propagates
 > *into* the currently displayed branch(es), so that these merge
 > nodes still have both ancestors visible?  That can be an important
 > clue to explore the side branch that just landed on the one you're
 > looking at.

Yes, those nodes are still displayed as before. It's only nodes that
go "out" of the branch that are hidden.


 > A context menu on such nodes (or on branch certs) to "add branch X
 > to this display".  That would fill out the intervening nodes
 > implied by any such dotted line as above.  A corresponding option
 > to collapse/remove one of the branches currently displayed in full
 > form would allow a fairly nice, interactive exploration of the
 > tree.

Right. The problem is that dot isn't the best tool for this kind of
dynamic updating : the layout can change quite a bit when the graph
changes (eg a branch that was displayed on the left is on the right
afterwards). It's a bit confusing.  But all right I can add that, it's
not a big deal.


 Daniel Carosone [Thursday 12 October 2006] :
 > Oh, while we're on the subject of propagate nodes, another feature
 > wish:
 > 
 >  When using the arrow keys to move around the revision graph, up
 >  and down arrow keys should try to stay on branch if possible,
 >  rather than always picking the visually-left ancestor.

Right.

-- 
   Olivier