So, a bit like tig? (Screenshots)
Doesn’t look like it.
I mean … tig does a lot more, but it also has the revision graph
-edit: typo-
Yeah but one is using Tk and the other doesn’t look any better than
git log --graph. I think the point of this is that it looks okish and is in the terminal.
This is really cool but I’m unsure why exactly the kitty/iterm image protocols are a requirement.
Is it to display the actual ‘graph’ on the left of the screen? If the terminal does not support image display does it degrade gracefully (e.g. unicode symbols) or does it just not work?
If it only works in terminal emulators with specific image support that seems a tad unfortunate for what otherwise seems a very nice fire-and-forget solution for trawling through commit logs.
Apparently there’s an automatic detection of what’s supported and a nice degradation. But yes, I don’t see a clear advantage wrt tig’s UTF-8 graph display.
Nice.
I tend to use the graph made bygit, but always feel like it would make my comprehension faster, if I had a properly rendered tree. But then I have been too lazy to use something likegitk.Looking at the repo, the code being Rust, I feel like I will give it a try the next time I need to view a graph and hopefully the interface matches my requirements.
Falls into a weird niche for me - if I’m in a situation where text-only history is not good enough, I’ll just use something graphical, rather than some crazy image-in-terminal solution.
Mostly in
gitI use an alias I wrote/stole ages ago which displays linear history compactly.It is a handful, but
git log --graph --decorate --all --full-index --color=always | less -Ris what I use and I think it’s great. Especially after I found the vim mode in my terminal emulator alacritty, and copying the commit hashes got really easy
