Re: Enhancements to git-protocoll

From: Fredrik Gustafsson <iveqy@iveqy.com>
Date: Jul 29, 2012, 15:05 UTC
Message-ID: <20120729150550.GA17679@paksenarrion.iveqy.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMK1S_iFqQvU+USYf+wcsLFS1QtsytLnPfEhjcAVZa9Vwj8d1w@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Jul 29, 2012 at 07:55:36PM +0530, Sitaram Chamarty wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> > Thanks, however I think auto-creation is a great feature for some cases
> > and I think there can be even more useable functions if we could get
> > user interaction.
> 
> For the record, I don't think I agree.  There's a place to create a
> human-conversation, and there's a place not to.
> 
> If you want a dialog with the server, there should be *other* commands
> that do that, instead of overloading git's own protocol.
> 
> Since you mentioned gitolite, consider copying the fork command
> (src/commands/fork) and munging the code into an explicit wild repo
> create.

I appriciate that you clearified you oppinion. Please excuse me if it sounded as I in any way speaked for gitolite. I use gitolite as an example becuase the target application in this case is unknown to most people (think gitolite with db-backend for user permissions).

It's a valid design oppinion to not mix git protocoll with anything else. But gitolite already does that. Gitolite already have user interaction mixed with git interaction. Do you say to me that gitolite is broken and should not do user interaction over git-commands? Then why does wild repos exists and why does gitolite error messages exists?

We're already down that road, why not do it better?

-- 
Med vänliga hälsningar
Fredrik Gustafsson

tel: 0733-608274
e-post: iveqy@iveqy.com