From: Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Jul 2008 05:56:10 GMT
Subject: Re: git push to amazon s3 [was: [GSoC] What is status of Git's Google Summer of Code 2008 projects?]
Message-ID: <20080708055610.GA12591@glandium.org>
In-Reply-To: <905315640807072248w44ccdc4y2f1cf54a10c50c43@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:48:59PM -0700, Tarmigan wrote:
> (trimmed cc list to folks who've touched http-push.c)
> 
> On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 9:19 PM, Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> wrote:
> > Using Marek's pack generation code I added support for push over
> > the dumb sftp:// and amazon-s3:// protocols, with the latter also
> > supporting transparent client side encryption.
> >
> > I chose to add these features to jgit partly as an exercise to prove
> > that Marek's code was built well enough to be reused for this task,
> > partly because I wanted to backup some private personal repositories
> > to Amazon S3, and partly to prove that multiple dumb transports
> > could implement push support.
> 
> That sounds cool.  I've been looking into adding s3 push into cgit,
> and was looking into modifying http-push.c, but got in over my head.
> I had trouble trying to make it fit into the DAV model that http-push
> is built around, in part because s3 doesn't seem to support any
> locking and a lot of the http-push code seems to be around the
> locking.
> 
> Can you describe the s3 support that you added?  Did you do any
> locking when you pushed?  The objects and packs seem likely to be
> naturally OK, but I was worried about refs/ and especially
> objects/info/packs and info/refs (fetch over http works currently out
> of the box with publicly accessable s3 repos).

FWIW, I'm starting to work again on the http backend overhaul. My idea
is to provide a generic dumb protocol vfs-like interface, so that other
dumb protocols could be built out of it.

Mike