| From: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Having postgresql.org link to cgit instead of gitweb |
| Date: | 2025-09-22 14:18:23 |
| Message-ID: | 09af2be0-29c4-4827-b225-b5a7af1e6683@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 9/19/25 4:54 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> On 9/19/25 4:14 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> writes:
>>> On a quick read, I believe this is easily settable in the cgit.css file
>>> by setting "tab-size" to "4". I did a quick test hacking this inline,
>>> and it worked.
>>
>> Cool, thanks for looking into it.
>
> Tested inline, but untested as a whole (as I don't have access to
> gitweb, nor do I really want to have access), but this is effectively
> the modification, the second line of the CSS rule.
If the main concern is lack of diff - which cgit gives us back, and the
main objection is the tab-size patch (in previous email)[1], is there
any objection to moving forward with updating the URLs after this patch
is applied (which I can't do, as I don't have privileges to that server)?
If there are objections, I'm fine to wait until after the release to
re-open discussion.
Jonathan
[1]
https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/38cfb119-a150-4899-8879-73e3ace66a6a%40postgresql.org
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Maxime Schoemans | 2025-09-22 14:38:53 | Re: [PATCH] Check that index can return in get_actual_variable_range() |
| Previous Message | Nathan Bossart | 2025-09-22 14:12:35 | Re: StatisticsObjIsVisibleExt lacks "do not look in temp namespace" |