From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: gitweb wishlist Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 12:22:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <20050511012626.GL26384@pasky.ji.cz> <1116384951.5094.83.camel@dhcp-188.off.vrfy.org> <1116611932.12975.22.camel@dhcp-188> <1116615600.12975.33.camel@dhcp-188> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Petr Baudis , Git Mailing List , Peter Anvin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri May 20 21:21:17 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DZD2E-0002Bi-1o for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 20 May 2005 21:19:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261540AbVETTUo (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2005 15:20:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261547AbVETTUo (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2005 15:20:44 -0400 Received: from fire.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:36238 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261540AbVETTUj (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 May 2005 15:20:39 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id j4KJKYjA014917 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Fri, 20 May 2005 12:20:35 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id j4KJKX2I028299; Fri, 20 May 2005 12:20:33 -0700 To: Kay Sievers In-Reply-To: <1116615600.12975.33.camel@dhcp-188> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.40__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.109 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 20 May 2005, Kay Sievers wrote: > > Somehting like this?: > http://kernel.org/git/?p=git/git.git;a=commitdiff;h=de809dbbce497e0d107562615c1d85ff35b4e0c5 Btw, at least for me, this looks much more interesting than the "commit" thing, and maybe it would make sense to make the summary links be to the "commitdiff" instead of the "commit"? Or is it just so much more expensive to generate, that we want to not have people go there normally? (hpa cc'd, since he may have some insight into whether this is likely to be an issue or not? It's not like git-diff-tree is that expensive, but it _does_ end up doing a "diff" against each changed file, of course, modulo any caching of results). Linus