From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Matthias Andree" Subject: Re: encrypted repositories? with git-torrent? Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:13:31 +0200 Message-ID: References: <200907182109.31275.thomas@koch.ro> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "John Tapsell" , git@vger.kernel.org To: thomas@koch.ro, "Linus Torvalds" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jul 20 14:13:44 2009 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 1MSrkT-0000Uk-SO for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:13:42 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753352AbZGTMNg (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jul 2009 08:13:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752876AbZGTMNf (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jul 2009 08:13:35 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:33747 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750780AbZGTMNe (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jul 2009 08:13:34 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 20 Jul 2009 12:13:33 -0000 Received: from balu.cs.uni-paderborn.de (EHLO balu.cs.uni-paderborn.de) [131.234.21.37] by mail.gmx.net (mp044) with SMTP; 20 Jul 2009 14:13:33 +0200 X-Authenticated: #428038 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19IouVR8KtIDtx/QDNVzl/7j6tQhzn/Tl6fevBhnb eQMtLK3We8l0aj Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=balu.cs.uni-paderborn.de) by balu.cs.uni-paderborn.de with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id KN2XYK-0004GO-5O; Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:13:32 +0200 In-Reply-To: <200907182109.31275.thomas@koch.ro> User-Agent: Opera Mail/9.64 (Win32) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.67 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Am 18.07.2009, 21:09 Uhr, schrieb Thomas Koch : > Wouldn't this be a use case for git-torrent? > http://code.google.com/p/gittorrent/ > http://repo.or.cz/w/VCS-Git-Torrent.git > > As I understand it, all data would be stored decentraliced and the > (optional?) central server only saves, who has which objects. I wonder about latency and accessibility here if clients are disconnected. Seems this is more for transferring repositories to large numbers of customers as sort of content distribution network for high load, rather than low connectivity - and the latter is my prime concern and also a detail of my scenario. -- Matthias Andree