Re: [PATCHv2] gitweb: gravatar support
- From
Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jun 20, 2009, 19:24 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200906202124.33278.jnareb@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7v63esklxh.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Fri, 19 June 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Giuseppe Bilotta <giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com> writes:
Show 37 quoted lines
> I see these repeated patterns in your patch.
>
> > @@ -4145,7 +4179,7 @@ sub git_shortlog_body {
> > my $author = chop_and_escape_str($co{'author_name'}, 10);
> > # git_summary() used print "<td><i>$co{'age_string'}</i></td>\n" .
> > print "<td title=\"$co{'age_string_age'}\"><i>$co{'age_string_date'}</i></td>\n" .
> > - "<td><i>" . $author . "</i></td>\n" .
> > + "<td>" . git_get_gravatar($co{'author_email'}, 16, 1) . "<i>" . $author . "</i></td>\n" .
> >...
> > - "<td><i>" . $author . "</i></td>\n" .
> > + "<td>" . git_get_gravatar($co{'author_email'}, 16, 1) . "<i>" . $author . "</i></td>\n" .
> >...
> > - "<td><i>" . $author . "</i></td>\n" .
> > + "<td>" . git_get_gravatar($co{'author_email'}, 16, 1) . "<i>" . $author . "</i></td>\n" .
> >...
> > - print "<tr><td>author</td><td>" . esc_html($co{'author'}) . "</td></tr>\n".
> > + print "<tr><td>author</td><td>" . esc_html($co{'author'}) . "</td>".
> > + "<td rowspan=\"2\">" .git_get_gravatar($co{'author_email'}) . "</td></tr>\n" .
> >...
> > - print "<tr><td>committer</td><td>" . esc_html($co{'committer'}) . "</td></tr>\n";
> > + print "<tr><td>committer</td><td>" . esc_html($co{'committer'}) . "</td>".
> > + "<td rowspan=\"2\">" .git_get_gravatar($co{'committer_email'}) . "</td></tr>\n";
> >...
>
> Doesn't it strike you as needing a bit more refactoring? The first three
> are identical, and you can refactor them to
>
> - "<td><i>" . $author . "</i></td>\n" .
> + "<td>" . oneline_person($author) . "</td>\n" .
>
> where oneline_person is
>
> sub oneline_person {
> my ($me) = @_;
> return ($me->{'smallicon'} .
> "<i>" . $me->{'name_escaped'} . "</i>");
> }[...]
Well, gitweb certainly needs some love^W refactoring. That is only one of areas. But should we postpone introducing new features till gitweb gets cleaned up? Although in this case I guess we can do cleanup during introduction of new feature (which makes stronger case for factorizing common elements, as they just get larger, those common elements, now with this feature).
> That way, people who do not like italics, or people who want to have the > icon at the end instead of at the beginning, can touch only one place > (i.e. "sub oneline_person").
About using presentational HTML: I think one reason behind keeping it is to have gitweb work also in text browsers like lynx, w3m or lynx, which can not understand CSS.
[...]
Show 5 quoted lines
> In the medium term, we may want to go one step further and do > > package person; > > and make sets of methods like "oneline_person".
That would be first in gitweb.
BTW. Should we split gitweb into packages? Should we split gitweb into separate files (one package per file)?
-- Jakub Narebski Poland