Make boring forks clearly boring (BB-336)

Issue #1585 closed
Ian Bicking
created an issue

Forks that haven't had any commits, or where all commits have been pulled into their parent, are boring. But they aren't easy to distinguish from interesting forks. Some UI to distinguish between these two states would be nice.

Comments (7)

  1. Eirik Stavem

    We're discussing making groups for repositories in #894, where "Archived" would be an automagical group. Perhaps there could be a similar "Inactive" group, with repositories that either have no commits at all since it was forked, and/or no commits in the last month?

  2. Nathan Brown

    This could be obvious if the various forks were represented in a graph, making it a duplicate of "#820 Bitbucket should have somthing like Github's Network graph".

    I'm actually somewhat surprised that bit bucket doesn't have this yet, as it's so powerful.

  3. Anonymous

    I don't think the graph would do much for me. I'd like to ignore boring forks; I can figure that out pretty easily from the changelog, but I don't want to get that far. If the fork hasn't had any commits to it (besides perhaps upstream pulls) then I'd like it filtered out, or starred, or colored different, or something like that. Clicking through to a graph wouldn't be useful.

    If I really want to understand another repository, I'd probably like to see a select set of changes that are unique to the fork (and aren't merges), and perhaps a complete diff (i.e., if you diffed the actual source files from both repositories, combining all changes).

    There might be other use cases for a graph that I haven't considered -- I haven't used github enough to be interested in the finer points of forked and merged repositories.

  4. Log in to comment