On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 02:14:33AM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > Our Makefile's default target used to build 'gitweb', though > > indirectly: the 'all' target depended on 'git-instaweb', which in turn > > depended on 'gitweb'. Then e25c7cc146 (Makefile: drop dependency > > between git-instaweb and gitweb, 2015-05-29) removed the latter > > dependency, and for good reasons (quoting its commit message): > [...] > In various recent patches & some upcoming ones I plan to submit I've > been trying to get the runtime of a noop "make" runs down, which really > helps e.g. with "git rebase -x make ..." running faster on a large > series. > > While you're right that this wasn't intentional to begin with, we have > lacked the "gitweb" as part of the default target since v2.4.5 now, and > adding it back is a major performance regression on noop "make" runs: Yes, I don't think building gitweb is worth the performance cost. Speeding things up was part of my original goal in e25c7cc146. It would be one thing if this were a recent change and somebody might be broken or confused by it not being built by default. But after 7 years, I think the question is: why _would_ we want to change the status quo and build gitweb by default? To exercise its Makefile for bugs, I guess, but IMHO it is not worth inflicting that on random developers. People who care about gitweb (if any) can build it themselves. I'd be even happier if it were just carried in its own tree. -Peff
