On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 03:17:14AM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > On Thu, 15 Jan 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxx> writes: > > > > >> That is, it links to marc (not gmane?) but finds no matches... > > > > > > what mailing list post should it point to? > > I found gmane to be much nicer to click through than marc. IIRC I found no way to actually make a gmane link since it requires POST query for the searches or something. > > I think Dscho's point is that you shouldn't be generating these links > > that lead to nowhere ;-). > > Almost. > > I wondered what the point was, and I would _welcome_ links that pointed to > the mails containing the patches (identified either by patch ids or by > manual editing; best would be to have both methods at the same time). Well, but you already have that, or at least an approximation. Do you think the approximation is inadequate? I would expect linking to a commit showing the inadequacy - I don't see how a false positive is inadequate at all, actually; even if we had a separate database with the mapping, for no records I think falling back to linking to a mailing list search still makes more sense than showing no link. I was not actually planning to carry the patch over the next gitweb update since I got no feedback on it (IIRC) since I implemented it. -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis The average, healthy, well-adjusted adult gets up at seven-thirty in the morning feeling just terrible. -- Jean Kerr -- 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
