Re: [RFC] gitweb: Add committags support (take 2)

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Dec 5, 2006, 01:08 UTC
Message-ID: <7v3b7vm9o4.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <200612041233.19377.jnareb@gmail.com>

Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

> You might have sha1 ids in commit message which no longer point to valid 
> (existing) object, for example commit which is result of 
> "git cherry-pick -x" from no longer existing temporary branch, or commit 
> which is result of "git revert" on a branch which got rebased (but not 
> reorganized), or shortened sha1 which is no longer unique. This should 
> not cause errors to be written to webserver log.

True.

> By the way, is it better to use anonymous subroutines for committags 
> subs, or use explicit subroutines?

I vaguely recall a thread that discussed pros and cons of using anonymous subroutines in certain parts of gitweb some time ago in which even Merlyn had some comments in, but I do not recall the technical details, sorry. My gut feeling is that the way you illustrated your example "our %committags" definition is fine, but it _might_ turn out that it is easier for sites or for projects to customize their own set of rewrite rules if you had explicitly named subroutines available. I dunno.