Some time ago when we were planning the migration, we decided (see
At that time, that fork was maintained. Now it seems to not be there anymore (at kernel.org).
AFAIK, we are not modifying warthog9 gitweb fork by ourselves. Actually that code is not public.
Another issue with a lot of information about this, also where this started:.
This idea is not new: we need to evaluate current alternatives of git web viewers and replace our warthog9 fork of gitweb with it.
- Make a list of current alternatives. An initial list on kernel.org git wiki. Also see
- Decide on the factors we are going to use to choose the replacement.
- Code is maintained.
- It needs to support caching. We can't hit the repository for every web request.
- It needs to be able to deal with a high number of repos. Specifically we can't have a repo list page that locks up the server. Preferably the ability to disable the listing all together.
- Add/edit more.
- Do performance testing, again, define factors to choose.
- Any other step?
User interface changes
Well, it will be a completely new interfase.
Maybe it worths to write some redirecting rules to avoid linkrot from issues linking gitweb.
Another minor note, any project we choose, it needs to be deployed at the same time as the versioncontrol webviewer plugin that supports it(i.e. make views commit listings point to the right new place).