From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2011, #02; Wed, 4)
Date: Thu, 05 May 2011 02:08:32 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3sjstv7kz.fsf@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vsjstc1pp.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
> --------------------------------------------------
> [Stalled]
>
> * jn/gitweb-js (2011-04-28) 13 commits
> - gitweb: Make JavaScript ability to adjust timezones configurable
> - gitweb.js: Add UI for selecting common timezone to display dates
> - gitweb: JavaScript ability to adjust time based on timezone
> - gitweb: Unify the way long timestamp is displayed
> - gitweb: Refactor generating of long dates into format_timestamp_html
> - gitweb.js: Provide getElementsByClassName method (if it not exists)
> - gitweb.js: Introduce code to handle cookies from JavaScript
> - gitweb.js: Extract and improve datetime handling
> - gitweb.js: Provide default values for padding in padLeftStr and padLeft
> - gitweb.js: Update and improve comments in JavaScript files
> - gitweb: Split JavaScript for maintability, combining on build
> - Remove gitweb/gitweb.cgi and other legacy targets from main Makefile
> - git-instaweb: Simplify build dependency on gitweb
>
> Rerolled. Waiting for comments.
Should I extract first two commits i.e.
- Remove gitweb/gitweb.cgi and other legacy targets from main Makefile
- git-instaweb: Simplify build dependency on gitweb
into a separate patch series? Even though their existence was
triggered by further patches in series, or to be more exact
- gitweb: Split JavaScript for maintability, combining on build
I think this cleanup is worthy on its own.
> * jn/ctags (2011-04-29) 6 commits
> - gitweb: Optional grouping of projects by category
> - gitweb: Modularized git_get_project_description to be more generic
> - gitweb: Split git_project_list_body in two functions
> - gitweb: Mark matched 'ctag' / contents tag (?by_tag=foo)
> - gitweb: Change the way "content tags" ('ctags') are handled
> - gitweb: Restructure projects list generation
>
> Waiting for comments.
Should I do and post benchmarks for
- gitweb: Restructure projects list generation
change (when 'forks' feature is used)?
Note that "gitweb: Mark matched 'ctag' / contents tag (?by_tag=foo)"
has ACK from Petr Baudis ('pasky'). I think http://repo.or.cz is main
or even only user of content tags.
--
Jakub Narebski
Poland
ShadeHawk on #git
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-05-05 9:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-05-05 2:37 What's cooking in git.git (May 2011, #02; Wed, 4) Junio C Hamano
2011-05-05 7:52 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2011-05-05 9:08 ` Jakub Narebski [this message]
2011-05-05 15:59 ` Junio C Hamano
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=m3sjstv7kz.fsf@localhost.localdomain \
--to=jnareb@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/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