gitweb[-caching] vs cgit

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Thu, 31 May 2012 09:24:49 -0400
Bill Nottingham <notting at redhat.com> wrote:

> Bill Nottingham (notting at redhat.com) said: 
> > Mathieu Bridon (bochecha at fedoraproject.org) said: 
> > > On Wed, 2012-05-30 at 17:52 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > > > >>>>> "KF" == Kevin Fenzi <kevin at scrye.com> writes:
> > > > 
> > > > KF> People would have that in their history and the like, but
> > > > KF> we don't officially point into gitweb anywhere do we?
> > > > 
> > > > bugz.fedoraproject.org does, but of course that's a trivial
> > > > change.
> > > 
> > > There are also two links here:
> > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Using_Fedora_GIT#References
> > 
> > And presumably quite a few links in bugzilla comments, etc.
> 
> A naive query shows 2469 links to
> http://git.fedoraproject.org/git/?...

Yeah. 

Two possible options: 

a) Setup some kind of redirect for the old links that tries to get
people to approximately the same package/area. 

b) Setup a redirect to a page that says we switched to cgit and how to
search it for what they are looking for. 

Looks like there are some folks who have worked on such redirects in
the past: 
http://ao2.it/en/blog/2011/05/06/migrate-gitweb-cgit-url-rewrite-rules

Does anyone know how often those urls are really accessed? 
I would expect in the case of bugs to be used perhaps for reference
during reviews or bugs, but then when closed, no one bothers anymore?

Any further feedback on this idea? ;) 

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/infrastructure/attachments/20120601/2e997b4a/attachment.sig>