Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 1/7] ui-blame: create enable-blame config item

2017-09-23 Thread Jeffrey Smith
I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. I suppose setting it to false would avoid springing the potential added resource use on people, as blame can be a relatively expensive operation. On Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 10:46 AM, John Keeping wrote: > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 10:38:42PM -0500,

Re: [RFCv2 PATCH 1/7] ui-blame: create enable-blame config item

2017-09-23 Thread John Keeping
On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 10:38:42PM -0500, Jeff Smith wrote: > Signed-off-by: Jeff Smith > --- > cgit.c | 3 +++ > cgit.h | 1 + > cgitrc.5.txt | 5 + > 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/cgit.c b/cgit.c > index 1dae4b8..c03f69c 100644 > --- a/cgit.c > +++ b/cgit.c

[RFCv2 PATCH 1/7] ui-blame: create enable-blame config item

2017-09-22 Thread Jeff Smith
Signed-off-by: Jeff Smith --- cgit.c | 3 +++ cgit.h | 1 + cgitrc.5.txt | 5 + 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+) diff --git a/cgit.c b/cgit.c index 1dae4b8..c03f69c 100644 --- a/cgit.c +++ b/cgit.c @@ -183,6 +183,8 @@ static void config_cb(const char *name, const char *value)