5 ms·
Exactly! You mean like this? https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/gorilla/mux@9fa818a44c2bf1396a17f9d5a3c0f6dd39d2ff8e/-/def/GoPackage/github.com/gorilla/mux/-/Cu
by beliu 10y ago
Exactly! You mean like this? https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/gorilla/mux@9fa818a44c2bf1396a17f9d5a3c0f6dd39d2ff8e/-/def/GoPackage/github.com/gorilla/mux/-/CurrentRoute https://sourcegraph.com/github.com/gorilla/mux@9fa818a44c2bf...
- michaelmior 10y agoExactly :) Cool! Although it seems weird to me to have the revision in the middle of the URL.
- the_common_man 10y agoThis also works for tags and branches (or any 'ref' for that matter instead of the sha1)
- sqs 10y agoWhere would you want the revision? At the very end? Right now, it's associated with the repo, which makes sense and is easier on our URL routing. But I'm curious to hear what you'd prefer.
- michaelmior 10y agoActually on further thought maybe this does make more sense. I don't really have a strong preference either way anyway.
- OJFord 10y agoI think I agree with parent - if the premise is that the units we're dealing with are the functions, then I want to usually access `/function`, and `/function/revision` is being more specific. I get what you're saying, but it seems like the URL mixes where you're coming from with where you want to take us.
- JoshTriplett 10y agoI think it actually makes sense there, as a logical hierarchy: you want a given repository, at a given revision (e.g. a commit hash), and a given file within that revision.