Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2011, #02; Wed, 4)

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: May 5, 2011, 15:59 UTC
Message-ID: <7v39ktb0jq.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <m3sjstv7kz.fsf@localhost.localdomain>

Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:

Show 10 quoted lines

>> Rerolled.  Waiting for comments.
>
> Should I extract first two commits i.e.
>
>    - Remove gitweb/gitweb.cgi and other legacy targets from main Makefile
>    - git-instaweb: Simplify build dependency on gitweb
>
> into a separate patch series?  Even though their existence was
> ...
> I think this cleanup is worthy on its own.

Sounds like a good idea.  Thanks.

Show 18 quoted lines

>> * jn/ctags (2011-04-29) 6 commits
>>  - gitweb: Optional grouping of projects by category
>>  - gitweb: Modularized git_get_project_description to be more generic
>>  - gitweb: Split git_project_list_body in two functions
>>  - gitweb: Mark matched 'ctag' / contents tag (?by_tag=foo)
>>  - gitweb: Change the way "content tags" ('ctags') are handled
>>  - gitweb: Restructure projects list generation
>> 
>> Waiting for comments.
>
> Should I do and post benchmarks for
>
>    - gitweb: Restructure projects list generation
>
> change (when 'forks' feature is used)?
>
> Note that "gitweb: Mark matched 'ctag' / contents tag (?by_tag=foo)"
> has ACK from Petr Baudis ('pasky').

... meaning the first three in the series? I missed that. Thanks for a reminder.