Re: [PATCH] gitweb: Adding a `blame' interface.

["Martin Langhoff" <martin.langhoff@gmail.com>]

On 6/12/06, Florian Forster <octo@verplant.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 10:02:05AM +1200, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> > good! git-blame/git-annotate are quite expensive to run. Do you think
> > it would make sense making it conditional on a git-repo-config option
> > (gitweb.blame=1)?
>
> sure, that it's a big change and if it helps the kernel.org folks ;)
> I'll follow-up with a patch for this in a second..

That'd be great. I am looking into integrating other feature patches
too (like tarball downloads) that are useful but costly, making them
conditional too...

> Would it help to cache `git-annotate's output, e.g. using one of the

I think we can rely on proxies doing good caching -- a busy host like
kernel.org will have big reverse proxies in front. A git-blame for a
given file+commitsha doesn't change, so we can give it a long cache
time, like... forever ;-)

> I have two more points regarding gitweb's configuration:
> - IMHO it would make sense to move the general gitweb-configuration
>   (where are the repositories, where are the binaries, etc) out of the
>   script.  As far as I know the Debian maintainer of the `gitweb'
>   package has asked for this before but was refused for some reason..

Sounds like a reasonable request. I would make it rely on env vars,
$ENV{GITWEB_CONFIG} can generally point to /etc/gitweb.conf, and that
would override the config values we have.

This is trivial, and it means we buy a lot of flexibility from
apache's httpd.conf being able to point to different config files
depending on arbitrarty conditions.

BTW, I haven't seen the debian maintainer's request, was that on the list?

> - If `GIT_DIR/description' is only used by gitweb it may be more
>   consistent to use the git-repo-config option `gitweb.description' in
>   the future.

Not sure how git-repo configurations deal with long entries. Right now
the description may contain html for instance.



martin