Hi, I am pretty new to this list. Just joined yesterday, and only just getting a gitorious installation setup behind the firewall. However, my thoughts are if HTTP can offer everything that SSH can with the same reliability, rather go with a single protocol. It would make the code easier to maintain, as well as much simpler to configure.
Just my 2cents ;) Regards, Ismail On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 7:40 AM, Marius Mårnes Mathiesen < marius.mathie...@gmail.com> wrote: > Anyone subscribed to this list will know that installing Gitorious is not > for the faint of heart. There are a lot of moving parts, a lot of > dependencies, and getting everything right is difficult. I really want to > change this. > > One of the things that complicates the setup is that Gitorious is not just > a web app. It's also: > - a service running on top of SSH, using key infrastructure for > authentication and authorization > - a daemon that serves Git repositories over a dedicated protocol (git://) > - a service that provides Git access over HTTP > > Historically, the only protocol that offered write access in Git was SSH. > The git protocol was mainly used because it's faster than HTTP and doesn't > require authentcation over SSH. These two things are the main reasons why > you want to run all these daemons on your server: > - SSH for push > - Git for fast, anonymous pull > > Git's HTTP support changed a lot in version 1.6.6, introducing "smart" > HTTP. It's a fairly simple concept; a modern Git client will (if supported > by the server) open a series of HTTP POST requests to the server, basically > running regular git traffic (upload-pack and receive-pack) over this > connection. This means HTTP got a lot faster, the performance is comparable > to Git over SSH. And since HTTP supports authentication (unlike the Git > protocol) and encryption (SSL), this means you can support all Git usage > scenarios over a single protocol, and stil be safe. Oh, and as a bonus, > people stuck behind a firewall can finally join the party too. > > Gitorious' current HTTP support is based on the old (aka. dumb) HTTP method > (Scott Chacon has a really good write-up on the difference between "smart" > and "dumb" HTTP at http://progit.org/2010/03/04/smart-http.html), which is > slow, error-prone, read-only and locks up your Apache/nginx workers serving > static files. Git itself has a cgi that provides smart HTTP, but making it > work in a scenario where the incoming URL is different from the path on the > file system involves hacking Git itself. > > Christian and I have made a few experiments on implementing smart HTTP for > Gitorious, and this week we've been focusing on one of them: Mutt [1]. Mutt > is a cross breed (and also a git): > - It's written in Ruby > - It runs under JRuby > - It uses the awesome JGit library, which is an implementation of Git in > Java. JGit is used in EGit, the Git support in Eclipse, and in Gerrit, the > code review system used by the Android project > > Mutt will provide anonymous/authenticated fetch/pull and authenticated push > to your Gitorious server. It will be awesome, and it will be installed by a > single command. > > The question is: once we have an easily installed, anonymous/authenticated, > pull/push solution for Git traffic: is it time to deprecate the other > protocol handlers in Gitorious: > - The SSH handler > - The Git handler (git-daemon or git-proxy) > > Would anybody miss them? > > Discuss. > > Cheers, > - Marius > > [1]: https://gitorious.org/gitorious/mutt Yes, I know there's already a > program called Mutt, the name just fits really well. I promise we won't name > the binary mutt, and we won't read your .muttrc. > > -- > To post to this group, send email to gitorious@googlegroups.com > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > gitorious+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > -- To post to this group, send email to gitorious@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to gitorious+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
