+1, it seems to me that the chosen implementation has a pretty low severity in contrast to a the highly improved useability it provides...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committed in r2527 with sligth changes:
* title attribute removed (hardcoded english word)
* change to scm.css removed (not related to this feature)

Thanks.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jean-Philippe Lang wrote:
> Committed in r2527 with sligth changes:
> * ...
> * change to scm.css removed (not related to this feature)

I am in the opinion that it ís related in the sense of the styling of the feature. As such: I think these selectors maybe shouldn't be declared in source:/trunk/public/stylesheets/scm.css. Instead they seem to belong to the source:/trunk/public/stylesheets/application.css.

See the following screenshots:

|=. *Without the CSS style-declarations (as committed)* |=. *With the CSS style-declarations (like the patch)* |
| !linenumbers_without_css.jpg! | !linenumbers_with_css.jpg! |

As you see the changes are:
* on @hover@ -> underlining removed
* color -> instead of default link-color a more sophisticated gray-teint is used.

Though, consider it just a minor CSS-improvement... ;)

Thanks for your fast response on this issue...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, sorry. The style is committed in r2555.

> Instead they seem to belong to the source:/trunk/public/stylesheets/application.css

scm.css is included when browsing a repo or viewing a file. So I don't think this style is needed in application.css
Am I wrong?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Merged in 0.8-stable in r2556.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------