Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 09:54:56PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > One issue I did not describe in the message was to what extent we would > > want to allow operations other than the creating of a new repository > > itself. > > > > "Other than the creation" includes things like these: > > Hmph. I am not too excited by this list. What is the advantage of doing > them over the git protocol versus some out-of-band method? My feelings echo Peff's here. > Furthermore, in the case of many providers (e.g., github, > repo.or.cz), there is already a separate out-of-band interface for > doing "meta" stuff, like managing user accounts and repos. Isn't it > more natural for them to integrate these features with their > existing interfaces? Don't forget about my day-job project, Gerrit Code Review. I'm already hosting 138 projects on review.source.android.com, and based on weekly downloads of Gerrit builds I'd estimate another ~60 deployments at internal servers within organizations. (I'm doing weekly "stable" builds and I'm seeing an average of ~70 downloads for each build.) > But let's say that there really is some value in setting up this > channel (because we want a uniform way of doing these things so we can > add more automated tool support from the client side). Then I think it > makes sense to look at what the people in (2) above are doing already. > That is, what sorts of things can you already do (and not do) in > github's or repo.or.cz's interface? On top of that, it probably makes > sense to ask them if they are interested in such a feature, as they > would be primary users. And if they are, what do they want out of it? Earlier last week a co-worker who is new to git complained that he can't create a repository easily from his desktop. There may be value in being able to create a repository remotely, as it removes that confusion. But I think that's only true for situations where you are likely the owner of the repository in your own home directory, such as ~you on kernel.org. For "hosted repositories" like any of the systems you described above, there is a lot more to the creation than just executing "git init" somewhere. FWIW, JGit automatically creates a repository over the amazon-s3:// transport during push if it doesn't exist yet. In my mind, this is somewhat like scp or rsync automatically creating the destination directory when recursively copying a directory. For the usage of creating a new repository in your own home directory on some remote server, why isn't this just an option to git push? git push --create me@george:my/new/repo.git master It fits better with the push-creates-a-branch feature. Gitosis allows repositories to be created during the first push into that repository, if the repository is listed in the config and the user is permitted to write to it. GitHub and repo.or.cz allow you to create empty repositories, but both do so through the web interface. Gerrit Code Review still requires you to manually run "git init" and also do a SQL INSERT by hand. Its missing some sort of user friendly repository creation feature. But I'm starting to consider doing it automatically during "git push", like gitosis does. Repository creation in Gerrit is more than just "git init" and a SQL INSERT. I also have to run rsync a few times to replicate the repository onto multiple servers, so that subsequent pushes to those servers won't fail. I suspect the situation is the same for GitHub; I know they have a custom daemon that handles repository mapping, and some database behind that daemon to store those translations. IMHO, _if_ we do support remote repository creation, it should match branch creation UI better (meaning, be part of git push, not part of git init), and it should be something that the hosted providers can all hook into so we can keep our non-git state management current. -- Shawn. -- 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
