Thanks for the replies everyone. On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 19:44, Petr Baudis <pasky@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 01:56:41PM +0000, Aneurin Price wrote: >> Does anyone have any remarks about these options? Is there a better option - how >> difficult would it be to add native support to git? > > I'm not really familiar with Amazon S3 _or_ the current transport > code, but by cursory examination of both, it seems that it would be > fairly easy to add support for another transfer. And it might be even > better idea to actually just add generic support to invoke an external > helper to perform all the heavy lifting. > > Basically, all the abstraction is already pre-cooked in the form of > rsync protocol support. I would just cut'n'paste that and replace rsync > magic with simple calls to external helper along some sensible simple > API, then code up an easy wrapper for S3 there. Or just add S3 API > support directly to core Git - it doesn't seem to be licence-encumbered. > Should take just a couple of hours including debugging, if you just > copy the existing rsync support functions. > This sounds like the most interesting option, if not necessarily the most practical. I've also discovered s3cmd (http://s3tools.org/s3cmd) which seems to be widely packaged and could probably serve nicely as that wrapper. If I can manage to get those couple of hours free at some point I'll give it a go. Is this something that might be a mergeable feature? Thanks again, Aneurin Price -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html