git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
To: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, admin@repo.or.cz, John Hawley <warthog9@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] gitweb: Restructure projects list generation
Date: Sun, 27 Feb 2011 04:08:38 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110227100838.GA24919@elie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110226215230.5333.92839.stgit@localhost.localdomain>

Hi,

Jakub Narebski wrote:

> Extract filtering out forks (which is done if 'forks' feature is
> enabled) into filter_forks_from_projects_list subroutine

Context (to remind myself): the git_get_projects_list function decides
which repositories to show on the homepage.  git_project_list_body
takes care of actually showing them in a table; it displays a "+" sign
in front of projects with forks and generally the project list it is
passed omits the forks themselves.

git_get_projects_list needs to be reasonably fast, since it is used
to validate the "project" parameter in every request.

[...]
> Both are now run _before_ displaying projects, and not while printing;
> this allow to know upfront if there were any found projects.  Gitweb
> now can and do print 'No such projects found' if user searches for
> phrase which does not correspond to any project (any repository).

Aren't forks filtered out by git-get-projects-list already?

[...]
> Filtering out forks and marking repository (project) as having forks
> is now consolidated into one subroutine (special case of handling
> forks in git_get_projects_list only for $projects_list being file is
> now removed).

Ah, no, they aren't.  That's a good change for consistency already.

> Forks handling is also cleaned up and simplified, which
> might mean some changes in output.

(Not having read the code yet) this part is not obvious to me.  Maybe
an example could help.

[...]
> The interaction between forks, content tags and searching is now made
> more explicit: searching whether by tag, or via search form turns off
> fork filtering (gitweb searches also forks, and will show all
> results).

Hm, or maybe this is it.

> IMVHO the code is
> cleaner.

So some general code tidying is intermixed.

> --- a/gitweb/gitweb.perl
> +++ b/gitweb/gitweb.perl
> @@ -2646,18 +2646,20 @@ sub git_get_projects_list {
[...]
> -		my $dir = $projects_list . ($filter ? "/$filter" : '');
> +		my $dir = $projects_list;
>  		# remove the trailing "/"
>  		$dir =~ s!/+$!!;
> -		my $pfxlen = length("$dir");
> -		my $pfxdepth = ($dir =~ tr!/!!);
> +		my $pfxlen = length("$projects_list");
> +		my $pfxdepth = ($projects_list =~ tr!/!!);
[...]

$dir is the same as before except that trailing slashes are removed,
and meanwhile the stripped names of directories returned from find()
will include $filter.  Should be almost a no-op (i.e., a nice
simplification).

> @@ -2672,14 +2674,14 @@ sub git_get_projects_list {
>  				# only directories can be git repositories
>  				return unless (-d $_);
>  				# don't traverse too deep (Find is super slow on os x)
> +				# $project_maxdepth excludes depth of $projectroot
>  				if (($File::Find::name =~ tr!/!!) - $pfxdepth > $project_maxdepth) {

A bugfix.  $project_maxdepth is advertised to be relative to the
projectroot but it was relative to $projects_list/$filter.

[...]
> @@ -2703,32 +2704,9 @@ sub git_get_projects_list {
>  			if (!defined $path) {
>  				next;
>  			}
> -			if ($filter ne '') {
> -				# looking for forks;
> -				my $pfx = substr($path, 0, length($filter));
> -				if ($pfx ne $filter) {
> -					next PROJECT;
> -				}
> -				my $sfx = substr($path, length($filter));
> -				if ($sfx !~ /^\/.*\.git$/) {
> -					next PROJECT;
> -				}
[...]
> +			# if $filter is rpovided, check if $path begins with $filter

s/rpovided/provided/ :)

> +			if ($filter && $path !~ m!^\Q$filter\E/!) {
> +				next;

Why did the code check for \Q.git\E$ before?  If I'm not missing
something, I'm happy to see the condition go.

What if $filter is 0?  Silly question, I guess.

[...]
> @@ -2745,6 +2721,67 @@ sub git_get_projects_list {
>  	return @list;
>  }
>  
> +# this assumes that forks follow immediately forked projects:
> +# [ ..., 'repo.git', 'repo/fork.git', ...]; if not, set second
> +# parameter to true value to sort projects by path first.
> +sub filter_forks_from_projects_list {
> +	my ($projects, $need_sorting) = @_;
> +
> +	@$projects = sort { $a->{'path'} cmp $b->{'path'} } @$projects
> +		if ($need_sorting);

What happens in this scenario?

	git.git
	git.related.project.git
	git/platforms.git

[...]
> @@ -4747,23 +4784,36 @@ sub fill_project_list_info {
>  		if (!defined $pr->{'owner'}) {
>  			$pr->{'owner'} = git_get_project_owner("$pr->{'path'}") || "";
>  		}
> -		if ($check_forks) {
> -			my $pname = $pr->{'path'};
> -			if (($pname =~ s/\.git$//) &&
> -			    ($pname !~ /\/$/) &&
> -			    (-d "$projectroot/$pname")) {
> -				$pr->{'forks'} = "-d $projectroot/$pname";

So currently we treat project.git as having forks when the
corresponding project/ directory exists, even when the latter is
empty.  The proposed new rule is that project.git has forks if and
only if there is at least one project/foo.git repository.  Sensible.

Thanks for a pleasant read.

Hope that helps,
Jonathan

  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-27 10:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-26 22:06 [PATCH/RFC] gitweb: Restructure projects list generation Jakub Narebski
2011-02-27 10:08 ` Jonathan Nieder [this message]
2011-02-27 15:03   ` Jakub Narebski
2011-03-01  1:01     ` Jakub Narebski
2011-03-02 16:11       ` [PATCHv2/RFC] " Jakub Narebski

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20110227100838.GA24919@elie \
    --to=jrnieder@gmail.com \
    --cc=admin@repo.or.cz \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jnareb@gmail.com \
    --cc=warthog9@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).