Re: [RFC PATCH] gitweb: use HEAD as primary sort key in git_get_heads_list()

On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 11:14:40PM +0200, Greg Hurrell wrote:

Prior to this commit, the "heads" section on a gitweb summary page would
list the heads in `-committerdate` order (ie. the most recently-modified
ones at the top), tie-breaking equal-dated refs using the implicit
`refname` sort fallback.

This commit adds another `--sort` parameter to the `git for-each-ref`
invocation in `git_get_heads_list()`, ensuring that the `HEAD` ref
always ends up getting sorted to the top, seeing as it is typically the
"primary" line of development in some sense.

This seems to be a useful change, because I can't see anywhere else in
the gitweb UI where we actually indicate to the user what the "default"
branch is (ie. what they'll checkout if they run `git clone`).

Your use of "seems" in the final paragraph is a leftover from the
earlier commit message, and I think weakens your message. It's OK to
assert that it really _is_ a useful change, I would say. :)

This patch looks good to me overall. In addition to dropping the RFC
tag, you're more likely to get attention by having a subject line
without "Re:" in it (so people realize it's a patch to look at, and not
just a continuation of the discussion).

On Tue, Jun 8, 2021, at 11:02 AM, Greg Hurrell wrote:

quoted

On Tue, Jun 8, 2021, at 10:34 AM, Jeff King wrote:

quoted

  1. break ties by name, like:

       git for-each-ref --sort=refname --sort=-committerdate

  2. emphasize the HEAD branch, even if it isn't the newest:

       git for-each-ref --sort=refname --sort=-committerdate --sort=-HEAD

I was wracking my brains over this one trying to figure out why
it wasn't already doing the right thing based on what I see in
ref-filter.c.  It sure looks like the `--sort=refname` fallback should
be automatic, but I wasn't seeing it happen in my gitweb instance.

Turns out there was a bug that you fixed in 7c5045fc180ed09ed4cb5 which
made it in soon after v2.20.4 fixing a problem. I was seeing different
behavior on gitweb running on Amazon Linux AMI, because that's still
using Git v2.18.5.

Heh, OK. I almost suggested "gee, wouldn't it be nice if we used the
refname as a fallback tie-breaker by default". You'd think I would
either remember such fixes, or at least bother to look at the code. :)

So, that means "1" isn't necessary. "2" is the only possibly interesting
bit. I've reworded the commit text accordingly, still labeled as "RFC"
to see if there is any consensus on this being a good idea or not.

Yep, I agree on all counts.

In my experience gitweb doesn't tend to get a lot of interest from
reviewers, and I consider it mostly in maintenance mode these days. So
be prepared for silence. In that case, I'd give it a few days and repost
the patch to see if Junio is interested in picking it up.

-Peff