Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I had to step back a bit and ask myself what we are trying to achieve
> here. When the current blame and incremental one are both working
> perfectly and well, will there be a reason for the end users to choose
> between them when they click?
>
> My answer is no. If the incremental one gives nicer user experience in
> all cases, it will be shown without the non-incremental one; if the
> incremental one makes the server or network load too heavy, a site owner
> may decide to show only the non-incremental one.
>
> That makes my addLinks suggestion a change that would help _only_ while we
> are working kinks out of the incremental one.
>
> Let's not waste too much effort doing that. Sorry for suggesting.
>
> Letting the site owner choose if the site wants to set the "incremental if
> possible" boolean would be more than adequate, I think.
Sorry, but I guess I dropped the ball after this message. If I understand
correctly, the conclusion is that I can apply the patch in this one
From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [RFC/PATCH] gitweb: Make linking to actions requiring JavaScript a feature
Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2009 21:12:15 +0100
Message-ID: <200911262112.16280.jnareb@xxxxxxxxx>
and shipping 1.6.6 with it (perhaps setting 'default' to '[0]' instead)
would be both reasonably safe and allows easy experimentation by willing
site owners (or individual gitweb deployment), right?
Please advice if I am mistaken.
Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html