Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 487033
git.conf should be named gitweb.conf
Last modified: 2017-04-06 06:38:09 EDT
Description of problem:
The name of /etc/httpd/conf.d/git.conf is confusing, it should be /etc/httpd/conf.d/gitweb.conf because it's specific to the gitweb service.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Review name of components in gitweb RPM.
Steps to Reproduce:
The configuration file of 'git.conf' should be reserved for HTTP download access to a git repository. After the bug 479613 is addressed to move gitweb.cgi over to /var/www/cgi-bin/, a new git.conf like this can be used to provide public access to the repository.
Alias /git /var/www/git
# SetEnv GITWEB_CONFIG "/etc/gitweb.conf"
# AuthType Basic
# AuthName "Git userr"
# AuthUserFile /etc/httpd/conf.d/git.password
<LimitExcept GET HEAD PROPFIND OPTIONS REPORT>
# Require valid-user
Please note that this change would break existing configuration for a rather small benefit.
Well, at some point the existing gitweb configuration is going to change, to help with bug 479613. There's also the new 'smart http' backend in git upstream, which may also require configuration. I've not looked much at that yet.
I've provided an example git.conf in bug 561284 which enables both Gitweb and cloning over HTTP using the new git-http-backend mechanism. But also in that case the name gitweb.conf could be used for Gitweb related configuration.
Contraty to Lubomir's opinion, I'd say that the change of breaking existing configuration (by simply renaming /etc/httpd/conf.d/git.conf to /etc/httpd/conf.d/gitweb.conf) is relatively small, unless someone upgrading to a newer Gitweb RPM version already has a /etc/httpd/conf.d/gitweb.conf im place for some service other than Gitweb (which is quite unlikely).
On the other hand, the naming of this file has already led to lots of confusion as we're exposing both Git and Gitweb, and new people on the team take some time to get used to the fact that git.conf is not for Git, but instead scm-git.conf is.
As the history of bug 479613 demonstrates, there's no sense in waiting for fundamental configuration changes.
4 years have already passed and nothing happened, while a simple rename of a config file in the gitweb rpm package should take much less than that.
Please yes. Decouple small changes from unscheduled large changes.
Fedora EPEL 5 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2017-03-31. Fedora EPEL 5
is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.
If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora
or Fedora EPEL, please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If
you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current
release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug.
Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.