Revenge of the pretty pictures

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

John Arbash Meinel wrote:
> You don't really need the dXXXX for revisions in the main branch, as
> they are always the same distance as their revno.

Actually, that's not so.  d represents the max-distance-from-root.  That
means that if a revision merges a revision whose max-distance-from-root
is >= its revno, the distance will be greater than the revno.

For an example, look at the graph for the bzr.dev mainline.
Revision 1193 has a distance of 1196, because one of its parents is
8e4ad, whose distance is 1195.

> It would be nicer to have some other information to put there, but since
> there isn't much that is small enough and worthy enough. Perhaps the
> date of commit 2005-05-05 is pretty small, and might mean something.

True.  I'll put that in.

> Also, I think I like the clustered form more than the non-clustered. As
> I think it makes the ancestry follow a nice line

Most of the time, it does.  Where it falls down is when you do a merge
base, and the line goes from one cluster to another.  The other thing is
that it allows parents to be lower on the graph than their children,
which looks strange.

> And finally, it would be nice to have a color code (possibly in --help),
> so that we can figure out what --merge-branch means.

A legend?  I do have one in help, but it's descriptive:

If --merge-branch is specified, revisions in the merge-branch are red,
revision in the common history are orange, revision that are common
ancestors are blue, and the merge base is green.

Maybe I should adopt your style; you got the colours right, except that
'white' is really just 'no-colour', and doesn't mean OTHER merges.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFDMxKK0F+nu1YWqI0RApJwAJsEPvb1IuRGL5kyzOHtL6VeD8dPrACcDRvq
RLtdJuHAE6+jm7JamnvCVow=
=jv6P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----