Re: VCSs on Alioth and personal repositories
Hi,
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Luca Capello wrote:
> soon after darcs.d.o became a reality [1], Zack asked me about
> including the support for it in debcheckout and I did it as bug
> #445714 [2], arising some discrepancies in how the personal
> repositories are managed:
>
> - git.d.o uses $HOME/public_git, which is then visible at [3]
... visible as git://git.debian.org/~gismo/test.git
> - darcs.d.o uses $HOME/public_darcs, but this is visible as [4]
This started with git because git-server has this nice integrated feature.
For darcs, I think you made specific changes to make it work. I hope they
will be integrated upstream because I don't like to rely on non-mainstream
change.
> - {arch,bzr,svn}.d.o uses /$VCS/private, visible as {[5],[6],[7]}
They are not the same. Those are backupped, whereas the previous ones are
not.
> Now some points, which are not really problems, but annoyances:
>
> 1) all the VCS servers but darcs store the repositories as
>
> VCS.d.o/VCS/...
>
> Is the subfolder VCS really needed? In that case we should have it
> for darcs.d.o, too.
It's not always technically needed. I agree that we should require it for
darcs too for consistency. But since I didn't setup it, I haven't said
anything... :)
> 2) I think we should be consistent also about how to store personal
> repositories, at least for web access. AFAIK the general structure
> for project repositories is
>
> VCS.d.o/VCS/$GROUP/$REPO
>
> I'd suggest to choose one of "private" (already used by 3 VCSs) or
> "users" (2) as $GROUP for personal repositories, being the latter
> my preference.
>
> Moreover, I'd prefer also to have personal repositories as
> public_$VCS folders, which as I already wrote is how git and darcs
> manage them ATM.
You mix up stuff. First of all, only distributed VCS have the
$GROUP/$REPO thingie. Then "private" and "users" are different beasts
concerning backup.
> 3) the second point is more important WRT debcheckout authentication
> mode: this because in order to fix bug #447791 [8] the check should
> be as more general as possible.
Anyone familiar with distributed repositories knows that he can't assume
to have write access on them... :-)
I don't really see your point. debcheckout can checkout a user repository and I
don't see why it should only succeed if you can write to it.
Cheers,
--
Raphaël Hertzog
Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux :
http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
Reply to: