Message ID | pull.1246.v2.git.1654623814.gitgitgadget@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
Headers | show |
Series | bitmap-format.txt: fix some formatting issues and include checksum info | expand |
"Abhradeep Chakraborty via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes: > There are some issues in the bitmap-format html page. "First, it does not even exist!" before anything else ;-) > For example, some > nested lists are shown as top-level lists (e.g. [1]- Here > BITMAP_OPT_FULL_DAG (0x1) and BITMAP_OPT_HASH_CACHE (0x4) are shown as > top-level list). There is also a need of adding info about trailing checksum > in the docs. > > Changes since v1: > > * a new commit addressing bitmap-format.txt html page generation is added Good. > * Remove extra indentation from the previous change Good. > * elaborate more about the trailing checksum (as suggested by Kaartic) Good. Will take a look (and audiences are requested to do so, too). Thanks.
On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 11:28:17AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Will take a look (and audiences are requested to do so, too).
I think this is on a good track. The rendered HTML still has much of its
content inside of <pre> elements, but that may be an acceptable
trade-off to maintain readability of the source material.
If there's a way to make the rendered page more appealing without
compromising on the readability of the source, I'd be in favor of that.
But I trust Abhradeep's judgement here, so if there isn't, I'd be happy
with the series (mostly) as-is.
I left a textual suggestion on the third patch, which I'd like to adopt
before picking this up (this will also give Abhradeep a chance to
investigate the formatting improvements on patch 2/3).
In the meantime, it's probably safe to drop Vicent Martà from the CC
list, since he is no longer working on Git (though I miss him very
much!).
Thanks,
Taylor
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > "Abhradeep Chakraborty via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> > writes: > >> There are some issues in the bitmap-format html page. > > "First, it does not even exist!" before anything else ;-) > >> For example, some >> nested lists are shown as top-level lists (e.g. [1]- Here >> BITMAP_OPT_FULL_DAG (0x1) and BITMAP_OPT_HASH_CACHE (0x4) are shown as >> top-level list). There is also a need of adding info about trailing checksum >> in the docs. > ... No, this is not quite ready for production. Almost all the "indented" material are shown in fixed-width typewriter format in the resulting HTML output. Look how ugly the output from it is. Not your fault; it is mostly because when the original text was written, it was not even meant to be given to AsciiDoc. https://twitter.com/jch2355/status/1534276427607986178/photo/1 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FUrYP2nakAAnRaH?format=png And as I already said, removal of the blank lines made it harder to see what is going on in the source, and because the output is pretty much straight copy of the source in the fixed-font, just like reading the source in the terminal, the output here is equally hard to read. https://twitter.com/jch2355/status/1534277664441511937/photo/1 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FUrZZXUUsAEmEeT?format=png If we really want to give it to AsciiDoc, we'd need to reformat it more extensively, not just tweak it on the surface and making an equivalent of <pre>...</pre> slightly easier to read, which is what this patch does. Thanks.
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote: > No, this is not quite ready for production. > > Almost all the "indented" material are shown in fixed-width > typewriter format in the resulting HTML output. > > Look how ugly the output from it is. Not your fault; it is mostly > because when the original text was written, it was not even meant to > be given to AsciiDoc. Actually, I am wondering how git-scm.com is able to produce a html page for bitmap-format.txt (if it is not passing to asciidoc). The design of asciidoc generated html pages in `make docs` are not same as the design of production html page designs. Probably, production uses some extra css code to beautify the asciidoc generated html files. So, the generated html file (production version) is not as bad as the locally built generated html. I need some understanding of the working of git-scm though (to verify it). If you see other locally built html pages - they would look similar to the bitmap-format html page. But in production, they are beautiful enough. By the way, I forgot to inform that https://git-scm.com/docs/pack-format#_original_version_1_pack_idx_files_have_the_following_format also has some weird formatting issues. See the <pre> block after the pack-idx structure drawing. There are other issues also which you can find (like having unnecessary indentations e.g. here[1] the second block under the "The header is followed by number of object entries...."). Thanks :) [1] https://git-scm.com/docs/pack-format#_pack_pack_files_have_the_following_format