Subject: Re: Adding URLs to CVSWeb diffs for source changes
To: John Nemeth <>
From: D'Arcy J.M. Cain <>
List: current-users
Date: 07/19/2007 07:48:52
On Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:43:33 -0700 (John Nemeth) wrote:
> On Dec 8,  8:22am, "Blair Sadewitz" wrote:
> }
> } Weighing the pros and cons, I think it might be best to create a
> } bulkier, "rich-text" html-source-changes list.  However, we don't want
> } to end up exponentially increasing the number of lists we have
> } according to each feature set people lobby for. ;)
>      So far only one person has said they don't like the idea.  Whereas
> a bunch of people both inside and outside of the project has said they
> do like the idea.  I don't think one naysayer should hold things up.

For some reason my posting on the subject never made it to the list or
at least I never saw it.  Sorry if this is a duplicate.

While I don't have a problem adding the link I wonder why we don't just
add the diffs to the email.  I do that for my projects and it is
extremely convenient.  It does make the email, and thus the archives,
larger but by the same token it also makes it easier to search for
specific changes.  Anyone on the list can quickly see what the changes
are without forking out to another program.  I find it very convenient.

>      One concern for me is that length of the URLs.  Here is one
> example:
> Notice how it wraps.  With the terminal program that I'm using, I can
> just point at an URL, right click, and the top item is "Launch this
> URL".  I can't do that when the URL wraps.  However, for people using
> web browsers to read their e-mails (I include things like Outlook
> Express in this category), the URL length won't be a problem.

GUI email programs are generally not an issue either.

>      Another thing to consider is messages with multiple commits.  With
> things like gcc imports, a single message can have more then 1,000
> items.  We probably don't want to add 1,000 diffs to a message.  Also,

I'm not sure why that is actually a problem.  People will either ignore
the links or read as many as they wish.  They may also be interested in
the changes to a specific file and you will probably cut that off.

> - don't include new files in messages

This one makes sense regardless.

D'Arcy J.M. Cain <>