Learn more about these different git repos.
Other Git URLs
while viewing source files and commit diffs, the colorization and markup is excessive, making it very hard to use. A couple ideas: background color seems unnecessary, the >> marks are strange, I don't know what they are intended for.
commit headers need a monospaced font.
in the list of commits, the info needs to be more compact so that more commits can be shown, see how much information appears in this view: https://sourceware.org/git/?p=lvm2.git;a=shortlog There is no need to print little pictures next to names, or put dark boxes around commit ids.
The general rule should be, stick to the essentials and avoid the extraneous. The browser is not the point, the code is. This shouldn't be designed for visual entertainment. Most recent git web viewers get this wrong, and try to steal the show from the code.
I'm only responding to issue [1] The >> indicates tabs, and the background colors are needed in order to detect trailing whitespace issues. These are the bare minimum syntax detections we need for our project, and should not be removed IMO.
I have no issues with [2] or [3], but the entire diff syntax uses a "pygment" style (not sure if this can be customized to do what you want, but it would be cool). As I wish there were blank lines between file diffs when patches are viewed from an Issue.
Enabling different highlighting/marks would be nice a nice solution, I suppose it's obvious that one set of choices will never suit everyone.
That could work, if the dev team approves it. It should not be that hard to have a list of highlighting styles to pick from.
Metadata Update from @wombelix: - Issue set to the milestone: 6.0
Login to comment on this ticket.