Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Apr 22, 2010, 21:15 UTC
Message-ID: <7vwrvz2npn.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100422202501.GJ10939@machine.or.cz>

Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> writes:

Show 18 quoted lines

>> d) Usage of the client:
>> 
>> This client can be used in 2 ways.
>> 
>> * Install a local version using instaweb - The gitweb will be only
>> accessible by you. You can browse through the git repository using
>> read modules and simultaneously work on them using write modules.
>> * Install on intranet - A company when installs this gitweb along with
>> some other login and account managing scripts will be able to order
>> their employees to login and ask them to work on the code with out the
>> security risk of providing ssh access to the git repository host. The
>> authentication support can be implemented as an optional part of my
>> proposal.
>> * Install on web - Just like normal gitweb, or enable write modules to
>> look like gist.github.com
>
> Note that for the latter two, operation mode without working copy is
> essential; I have not seen you address it anywhere.

What do you mean by "without working copy"? Is the proposal about having a working copy _per_ client on the server side, and the file editor and goodies listed in the "Wrote modules" list operate on these files?

Perhaps you meant to say "without working copy on the client side", and if that is the case I think we are on the same wavelength. That is exactly why I earlier said that I imagine that the "Gitweb client write support" would be based on something more standard like DeltaV, instead of rolling a custom hack that is not compatible with anybody else.