> On 22/12/2015, at 2:54 pm, Philipp Janda <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I must have misunderstood. Both github and bitbucket offer clone >> URL-likes that I thought were git+ssh: >> [email protected]:<username>/<repo>.git. >> Is this not SSH? If it were, it would have the advantage that ssh >> would take care of credentials, rather than having to stick them in a >> URL in the rockspec. > > That seems to be the alternative syntax for ssh URLs (gmane messed up > the link). The man page of `git clone` lists the following supported URL > types (plus some deprecated ones): > > * ssh://[user@]host.xz[:port]/path/to/repo.git/ > * git://host.xz[:port]/path/to/repo.git/ > * http[s]://host.xz[:port]/path/to/repo.git/ > * [user@]host.xz:path/to/repo.git/ > > LuaRocks uses the protocol part of the URL to figure out which fetcher > plugin to use. `git://` URLs use the `luarocks.fetch.git` module, > `git+http://` uses `luarocks.fetch.git_http`. The latter just strips the > `git+` part and passes the URL to `git clone`. Exactly the same code is > used in `luarocks.fetch.git_https`, and could be used in > `luarocks.fetch.git_ssh`. I don't think LuaRocks supports the > alternative ssh URL syntax because it doesn't know which fetcher to use.
The pull request at [1] supports both syntaxes, (so long as git+ssh:// is prepended to identify it), which might be overkill. I'd appreciate any feedback. [1] https://github.com/keplerproject/luarocks/pull/469 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/luarocks-developers
