RFC: snapshot tarball information in refs/notes/snapshots
konstantin at linuxfoundation.org
Fri Mar 30 19:44:13 CEST 2018
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 05:38:29PM +0100, John Keeping wrote:
> > One other way I'd thought about doing this is via a post-update hook
> > that would read the configuration from an object in the repo into a file
> > cgit could read, but I didn't want to write out into .git/config.
> > That might be one way of achieving compromise -- support per-repository
> > configuration that users themselves can push, but make it up to the
> > server administrator to set up hooks so that the config gets written out
> > into .git/cgitrc (or repo.git/cgitrc) for cgit to consume. In my mind,
> > it was a note attached to the initial commit of the master branch, but
> > it can be any object that post-update can access and write out.
> > This way cgit doesn't need to rely on git to read this data, as it's a
> > regular config file inside the git dir. The post-update hook can also do
> > any sanitization of config parameters it deems necessary.
> > Does that make sense?
> Yes, repo.git/cgitrc is already read unconditionally when using
> scan-path to find repositories (under the same conditions as
Zomg, I had no idea, nice!
> I don't think notes are the right solution because they tie information
> to a particular commit and it's difficult to consistently pick a commit
> from which to pull the configuration: anything other than the tip of a
> branch will incur the cost of walking to find an annotated commit but
> keeping the note at the tip of the branch is difficult and likely to
> result in the configuration being lost.
Yeah, you're right about notes here. That said, I still want to be able
to pass tarball info and pgp signatures via notes attached to tags, per
my original RFC. :) We can drop the cgitrc configuration conversation
for now, since post-update hook with writing out of per-repo cgitrc will
work for me just fine -- especially if it already works as-is.
More information about the CGit