URI Scheme for git object ids?

URI Scheme for git object ids?

[Ed Warnicke]

Has there been any discussion of how one might represent a git object
id as a urn or uri?

It's clear that 'git:' is registered with IANA as a URI prefix for
locations of git repos.

I was wondering if there was any existing use of something like:

'gitoid:${type}:${hash type}:${hash of git object}' ?

So for example:

gitoid:blob:sha1:261eeb9e9f8b2b4b0d119366dda99c6fd7d35c64

which could be used to communicate generic git object ids.

Ed

Re: URI Scheme for git object ids?

[Junio C Hamano]

Ed Warnicke <hagbard@gmail.com> writes:

> Has there been any discussion of how one might represent a git object
> id as a urn or uri?
>
> It's clear that 'git:' is registered with IANA as a URI prefix for
> locations of git repos.
>
> I was wondering if there was any existing use of something like:
>
> 'gitoid:${type}:${hash type}:${hash of git object}' ?
>
> So for example:
>
> gitoid:blob:sha1:261eeb9e9f8b2b4b0d119366dda99c6fd7d35c64
>
> which could be used to communicate generic git object ids.
>
> Ed

I do not see why the object type should be there.  Once you locate
the object whose object name (in sha1) is 261eeb..., the object
should be able to identify itself as a blob (or whatever type it
is).

Aren't there already folks who are exchanging git objects over
torrent or something?  What do they use to identify what each node
offers and what participants want?

Re: URI Scheme for git object ids?

[Ed Warnicke]

Junio,

That's the kind of feedback (and pointers) I was hoping for :)

So is it fair to say you are suggesting:

1. Talk to 'torrent or something' folks to see if they have a scheme in use

and

2.  If not, 'gitoid:${hashtype}:${hashvalue} - like:
     gitoid:sha1:261eeb9e9f8b2b4b0d119366dda99c6fd7d35c64
     would be a better choice

Ed

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 11:40 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> Ed Warnicke <hagbard@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Has there been any discussion of how one might represent a git object
> > id as a urn or uri?
> >
> > It's clear that 'git:' is registered with IANA as a URI prefix for
> > locations of git repos.
> >
> > I was wondering if there was any existing use of something like:
> >
> > 'gitoid:${type}:${hash type}:${hash of git object}' ?
> >
> > So for example:
> >
> > gitoid:blob:sha1:261eeb9e9f8b2b4b0d119366dda99c6fd7d35c64
> >
> > which could be used to communicate generic git object ids.
> >
> > Ed
>
> I do not see why the object type should be there.  Once you locate
> the object whose object name (in sha1) is 261eeb..., the object
> should be able to identify itself as a blob (or whatever type it
> is).
>
> Aren't there already folks who are exchanging git objects over
> torrent or something?  What do they use to identify what each node
> offers and what participants want?
>

Re: URI Scheme for git object ids?

[Konstantin Ryabitsev]

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:35:52AM -0600, Ed Warnicke wrote:
> Has there been any discussion of how one might represent a git object
> id as a urn or uri?

This sounds similar to what git over ipfs folks wanted to do, but they ran
into obvious scaling problems. It works fine for small repositories with a few
dozen commits, but once we're talking millions, the process of doing anything
with such remote starts taking hours and days.

If you're interested in a decentralized forge solution, then Radicle has the
closest to something that is working. You just have to ignore all the crazy
cryptoblarf web3 stuff.

-K

Re: URI Scheme for git object ids?

[Ed Warnicke]

Konstantin,

I suspect you read a bit more into my question than I intended :)  I
do appreciate the breadth of your thought about it though :)

Mostly, I'm just looking for a way to express the git object id as a
uri scheme so completely outside-of-git things can refer to it clearly
(ie, know to prepend the object header before hashing to see if the
contents match).

Definitely not thinking of any vaguely web3 ideas :)

Ed

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 11:53 AM Konstantin Ryabitsev
<konstantin@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:35:52AM -0600, Ed Warnicke wrote:
> > Has there been any discussion of how one might represent a git object
> > id as a urn or uri?
>
> This sounds similar to what git over ipfs folks wanted to do, but they ran
> into obvious scaling problems. It works fine for small repositories with a few
> dozen commits, but once we're talking millions, the process of doing anything
> with such remote starts taking hours and days.
>
> If you're interested in a decentralized forge solution, then Radicle has the
> closest to something that is working. You just have to ignore all the crazy
> cryptoblarf web3 stuff.
>
> -K

Re: URI Scheme for git object ids?

[Konstantin Ryabitsev]

On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:58:01AM -0600, Ed Warnicke wrote:
> Konstantin,
> 
> I suspect you read a bit more into my question than I intended :)  I
> do appreciate the breadth of your thought about it though :)

Ah. Sorry, my perception is understandably tainted in the past few days.

> Mostly, I'm just looking for a way to express the git object id as a
> uri scheme so completely outside-of-git things can refer to it clearly
> (ie, know to prepend the object header before hashing to see if the
> contents match).

Okay, I understand -- so for purposes like adding to sigstore or other supply
chain tracking systems?

-K

Re: URI Scheme for git object ids?

[Ed Warnicke]

Exactly... anybody who wants to be able to say "This is a git object
id for a thing" rather than "this is a random sha1" (or perhaps
someday, sha256), and more importantly... if presented with say... the
same contents outside of a git repo repeat the computation of the git
object id and see that it's referring to the contents they have in
their hands.

That had been my original thought around including the 'object type'
(gitoid:blob:sha1:261eeb9e9f8b2b4b0d119366dda99c6fd7d35c64) because if
presented with an array of bytes outside of a git repo, if I want to
know whether or not it matches the git oid, I need to know what git
object type to put in the git header prepended to the contents.

I have a tendency to generalization though, and so its'1 good to get
feedback from folks closer to git as to whether that makes sense or
not.

As a side note: in case I'm being unclear: there is no conceivable
universe in which I'm advocating for git to change anything it does
around this conversation.  I'm just seeking 'advice'.  Among the space
of valid advice being: "don't reinvent the wheel, these folks already
have a perfectly serviceable wheel"

Ed

On Tue, Mar 1, 2022 at 12:30 PM Konstantin Ryabitsev
<konstantin@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2022 at 11:58:01AM -0600, Ed Warnicke wrote:
> > Konstantin,
> >
> > I suspect you read a bit more into my question than I intended :)  I
> > do appreciate the breadth of your thought about it though :)
>
> Ah. Sorry, my perception is understandably tainted in the past few days.
>
> > Mostly, I'm just looking for a way to express the git object id as a
> > uri scheme so completely outside-of-git things can refer to it clearly
> > (ie, know to prepend the object header before hashing to see if the
> > contents match).
>
> Okay, I understand -- so for purposes like adding to sigstore or other supply
> chain tracking systems?
>
> -K