Re: [RFC/PATCH 1/4] gitweb: Move subroutines to Gitweb::Config module

From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 9, 2010, 13:13 UTC
Message-ID: <AANLkTimXSfAqMYVIQcepibeDlJPOKE4hTlys9laEFTHo@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <201006090138.52125.jnareb@gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 1:38 AM, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On Tue, 8 Jun 2010, Petr Baudis wrote:
>>
>>   I thought we already discussed MVC and sort of agreed that it's an
>> overkill at this point. At least that is still my opinion on it; I'm not
>> opposed to MVC per se, but to me, this modularization is a good
>> intermediate step even if we go the MVC way later, and doing MVC properly
>> would mean much huger large-scale refactoring than just naming a module
>> Gitweb::View instead of Gitweb::HTML. Let's do it not at all, or
>> properly sometime later. I think it's well out-of-scope for GSoC.
>
> So it would be enough to have Gitweb with core of gitweb, gitweb.perl
> top-level script, Gitweb::Write or something like that for new write
> functionality and Gitweb::Util containing things that are needed by Gitweb
> and by Gitweb::Write(r).

Sidenote (something I meant to write, but forgot): SVN::Web[1][2] and Gitalist[3][4] might or might not be good example on how to split gitweb into modules.

[1] http://p3rl.org/SVN::Web
    http://search.cpan.org/dist/SVN-Web/
[2] http://jc.ngo.org.uk/svnweb/jc/browse/nik/CPAN/SVN-Web/trunk/

[3] http://p3rl.org/Gitalist
    http://search.cpan.org/dist/Gitalist/
[4] http://github.com/broquaint/Gitalist

-- 
Jakub Narebski