Re: Is there a reason to keep walker.c ?
- From
Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
- Date
- Jan 27, 2008, 21:23 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LNX.1.00.0801271603280.13593@iabervon.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20080127204535.GA4702@glandium.org>
On Sun, 27 Jan 2008, Mike Hommey wrote:
Show 7 quoted lines
> Hi, > > While working on the http code refactoring, I got to wonder if the > walker.c "wrapper", that is only used for the http transport, is still > worth keeping. If there are plans for others transport to use this code, > obviously, it would be worth keeping, but on the contrary, I think it > would simplify the http transport code even more. What do you think ?
It would be a good base for sftp (i.e. dumb file access over ssh). In fact, I think stuff should ideally be moved into walker.c such that the HTTP-specific code just handles access to files by filename and the logic of what files to request in what order is in walker.c. I think this would get the simplification you're looking for while making it easy to add sftp or any other situation where you have only slow remote filesystem-like access to the repository.
-Daniel *This .sig left intentionally blank*