Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Petr Baudis
Date: Sunday, April 18, 2010 - 3:31 pm

Thanks for work on the proposal!

On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 02:22:20PM +0530, Pavan Kumar Sunkara wrote:

I believe an important factor in the success of the project is getting
these changes merged upstream in the main Git branch.

If the rest of the project features is not merged (and it *won't* be for
the lack of trying), it will still be reasonably easy to use it as a
third-party modification. However, if the split-up itself will not be
merged, that will have big impact on the usefulness of the whole project
- so I consider this fairly crucial, please don't under-estimate this
part, getting things merged can take as much work as doing initial
implementation of the stuff! You should plan to submit these patches
quite early.


I'm sorry, I don't understand this.


Frankly, I'm not very excited from this. First, I recommend that you
completely separate splitting of gitweb to smaller pieces (without any
major conceptual changes) both in the proposal and in actual
submissions.

Second, you should justify the introduction of session management and
templating. What is the point and why is it neccessary for your project
goals?


Sounds reasonable. What am I missing is a way to edit files through the
web interface. Also, please spec in more detail the difference between
[8] and [11].


This is already supported by gitweb. And it's not a "write" operation.
;-)


How will you integrate this with the existing 'tree' action?


Why?


I.e. what we already do?


Frankly, the net security risk of providing git-shell access is probably
lower than using a web interface. ;-) However, I still see this making
many corporate people happy and opening doors to less canonical Git
usecases - it also enables "zero config" ability to contribute to Git
projects, desirable for less technical users (artists etc.).


Great!


I think this might end up being rather tricky, and would appreciate you
detailing this out a bit more, including some expected dates for initial
patch submissions.


I appreciate that you are thinking about this, though I'm less sure if
this can be efficiently done as a batch job like this.

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
http://pasky.or.cz/ | "Ars longa, vita brevis." -- Hippocrates
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Christian Couder, (Wed Apr 14, 9:30 pm)
Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Pavan Kumar Sunkara, (Sun Apr 18, 1:52 am)
Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Petr Baudis, (Sun Apr 18, 3:31 pm)
GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Pavan Kumar Sunkara, (Sun Apr 18, 11:35 pm)
Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Pavan Kumar Sunkara, (Sun Apr 18, 11:46 pm)
Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Pavan Kumar Sunkara, (Mon Apr 19, 12:38 am)
Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Pavan Kumar Sunkara, (Mon Apr 19, 5:57 am)
Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Pavan Kumar Sunkara, (Mon Apr 19, 10:55 am)
Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Pavan Kumar Sunkara, (Mon Apr 19, 11:03 am)
Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Pavan Kumar Sunkara, (Mon Apr 19, 11:10 am)
Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Pavan Kumar Sunkara, (Tue Apr 20, 5:17 am)
Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Pavan Kumar Sunkara, (Wed Apr 21, 1:49 pm)
Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Pavan Kumar Sunkara, (Thu Apr 22, 2:53 pm)
Re: GSoC 2010: "Integrated Web Client for git" proposal, Pavan Kumar Sunkara, (Thu Apr 22, 10:42 pm)