From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Stephen R. van den Berg" Subject: Re: [RFC] Adding a challenge-response authentication method to git:// Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:14:12 +0200 Message-ID: <20080814121412.GA25791@cuci.nl> References: <20080813162644.GC12200@cuci.nl> <20080813163646.GO32184@machine.or.cz> <20080814074805.GA21577@linode.davidb.org> <20080814082345.GQ10151@machine.or.cz> <20080814110739.GI9680@cuci.nl> <20080814113901.GR10151@machine.or.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Brown , git To: Petr Baudis X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Aug 14 14:15:21 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KTbjZ-0002G5-9o for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:15:17 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752029AbYHNMOO (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:14:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751903AbYHNMON (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:14:13 -0400 Received: from aristoteles.cuci.nl ([212.125.128.18]:38269 "EHLO aristoteles.cuci.nl" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751886AbYHNMON (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Aug 2008 08:14:13 -0400 Received: by aristoteles.cuci.nl (Postfix, from userid 500) id 59AA45465; Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:14:12 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080814113901.GR10151@machine.or.cz> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Petr Baudis wrote: >On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 01:07:39PM +0200, Stephen R. van den Berg wrote: >> Well, I looked into gitosis, and it solves part of the problem, it has a >> few downsides though: >> - It depends on Python for no particular reason (it might as well have >> been built using shellscripts only, or if need be Perl, since git >> already uses that); yet any extra dependency is creating an extra >> hurdle for portability and adoption. >Is this concern really any kind of practical one? To me it appears that >Python and Perl are both so extremely wide-spread that this might be >issue only on embedded systems, exotic systems with very low proportion >of git users, and users with strong ideological opinions about the >system (probably low proportion of git users too). I agree that in general it shouldn't be a major problem to get it on the systems you want to use it on; but it does increase the difficulty of auditing the solution before deploying it. >> Other than that, gitosis looks fairly good if you want to use public >> keys. >This doesn't seem to be convincing reason for _reimplementing_ the >solution. (Of course, I don't prevent you from doing that, I'm just >wondering about the feasibility.) I'm not going to reimplement gitosis. I'm going to do *less* than gitosis for situations where gitosis is undesirable (for whatever reason, not necessarily the critisisms I mentioned before). -- Sincerely, Stephen R. van den Berg. "Hold still, while I inject you with SQL."