[PATCH 2 of 2] graphlog: draw graphs in give order

[Benoit Boissinot]

On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 06:33:46AM +0500, vsh wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 4:43 AM, Benoit Boissinot <
> benoit.boissinot at ens-lyon.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Apr 04, 2010 at 11:39:53PM +0530, Vishakh wrote:
> > > # HG changeset patch
> > > # User Vishakh <vsh426 at gmail.com>
> > > # Date 1270404568 -19800
> > > # Node ID 4a7f1e4cb05f497e60d957e0fb73a3f4c351b70c
> > > # Parent  8f5646c4358358a4249273285793544f6e466443
> > > graphlog: draw graphs in give order
> > >
> >
> > Looking at the test output, it's not exactly nice.
> >
> 
> i am not sure exactly what is not nice. i should have mentioned
> that the meaning of o---+ is also reversed. originally + implied
> follow to see the parent while in the reverse graph its follow to see
> children.

So it would be nicer if we don't reverse the meaning of + ?
> 
> >
> > > diff -r 8f5646c43583 -r 4a7f1e4cb05f tests/test-glog.out
> > > --- a/tests/test-glog.out     Sun Apr 04 23:30:24 2010 +0530
> > > +++ b/tests/test-glog.out     Sun Apr 04 23:39:28 2010 +0530
> > > @@ -307,6 +307,245 @@
> > >     date:        Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
> > >     summary:     (0) root
> > >
> > > +% reverse glog -r :
> > > +o                changeset:   0:e6eb3150255d
> > > +|\               user:        test
> > > +| |\             date:        Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
> > > +| | |\           summary:     (0) root
> > > +| | | |\
> > > +| | | | |\
> > > +| | | | | |\
> > > +| | | | | | |\
> > > +o---+-+-+-+ | |            changeset:   1:6db2ef61d156
> > > +|\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \           user:        test
> > > +| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \         date:        Thu Jan 01 00:00:01 1970 +0000
> > > +| | |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \       summary:     (1) collapse
> > > +| | | |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
> > > +| | | | |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
> > > +o---+ | | | | | | | | | |      changeset:   2:3d9a33b8d1e1
> > > +|\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \     user:        test
> > > +| |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \   date:        Thu Jan 01 00:00:02 1970
> > +0000
> > > +| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |  summary:     (2) collapse
> >
> > The edges above look really weird. Additionally, should the graph look
> > the same as the previous graph, but reversed? The graph above in the
> > test output looks much simpler.
> >
> > edges look ok in my terminal. which part looks weird?
> the graph may or may not look similar to original graph in reverse. that
> depends on the amount of branching. the example in test was contrived to
> contain many complicated relationships. in other cases/repos it looked
> reasonable.  glog -r0:tip on the  mercurial repo is much saner and
> looks similar to reverse of tip:0.

In my opinion, there is still an alignement problem with the '\' edges
in the example above.

Benoit

-- 
:wq