Re: [PATCH] gitweb: Adding a `blame' interface.
- From
- Florian Forster <octo@verplant.org>
- Date
- Jun 12, 2006, 08:24 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20060612082448.GA11857@verplant.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <46a038f90606111502g607be3cfnf83ce81764a5f909@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Martin,
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 10:02:05AM +1200, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> good! git-blame/git-annotate are quite expensive to run. Do you think > it would make sense making it conditional on a git-repo-config option > (gitweb.blame=1)?
sure, that it's a big change and if it helps the kernel.org folks ;) I'll follow-up with a patch for this in a second..
Would it help to cache `git-annotate's output, e.g. using one of the `Cache::Cache' modules? Or is browsing of blobs too sparse for this to result in a performance gain? I'm sure the modules could be integrated as a weak precondition.
I have two more points regarding gitweb's configuration: - IMHO it would make sense to move the general gitweb-configuration (where are the repositories, where are the binaries, etc) out of the script. As far as I know the Debian maintainer of the `gitweb' package has asked for this before but was refused for some reason.. Possibly a file `gitweb.conf' in the same directory as the script could be read and overwrite the builtin defaults..? - If `GIT_DIR/description' is only used by gitweb it may be more consistent to use the git-repo-config option `gitweb.description' in the future.
Regards, -octo
-- Florian octo Forster Hacker in training GnuPG: 0x91523C3D http://verplant.org/