Re: Non-http dumb protocols

[Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>]

On Sun, 1 Jul 2007, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
> > Having said that, I have a feeling that many people do not build
> > any of the commit walkers, and especially the http walker,
> > because they have no need for dumb protocols, and libcurl-dev is
> > just another piece of dependency they do not have to have.
> 
> Interestingly, I just was involved in a discussion on IRC, where somebody 
> (out of quotat concerns) wants to use sftp to push to a bare repository, 
> which is served via HTTP.
> 
> Unfortunately, it seems that all persons wanting to have some support for 
> that, expect others to do the work for them.
> 
> However, there is a miniscule non-zero chance that eventually somebody 
> might want to realise an sftp push protocol (where you basically need the 
> ls-remote part of the fetcher, too, to determine what to pack and send). 
> And to complete a dumb sftp fetch protocol, you'd need a commit walker,
> so I'd like to have at least a minimal interface for commit walkers 
> waiting for that saviour.

Okay, I think I'll go for ditching ssh-fetch/-push, making the 
commit-walker code more modular, and possibly moving more of the smarts of 
http-fetch into the common code so that local-fetch is a better test for 
it and sftp fetch would be possible.

	-Daniel
*This .sig left intentionally blank*