On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 at 22:16:40, William Giokas wrote: > [...] > I am very much for this (and [1] is one of my mails from more than a year > ago). I would recommend working with gitolite so that we can keep as > much of the code we need maintained upstream, as gitolite has already > proven its security and its efficiency. Also, it may allow other users > to use gitolite with database backends like the AUR without using the > AUR itself. >
That was our initial plan but after some investigation it turned out that using gitolite might be much more complicated and inefficient than writing a simple authorization script from scratch: We would need to keep the gitolite and the AUR database in sync etc. See [1] for an initial implementation of a ~50 lines Python script that does all the work. > [...] > This would force users to change their upstream URLs based on > maintainership, which changes quite a lot on the AUR, but this is > something that was probably already thought of. I'd suspect that we > would still have to do something like > > git://.../pa/package > > but there may be a way around that, even. > I don't think we need to do this since the server has been upgraded to use ext4 iirc. > > If there are any questions or suggestions regarding this setup, please > > feel free to ask/reply. > > I think this is an amazing idea, and I have some good plans for things > like pre-commit hooks for local repos that will auto-generate the > .AURINFO file for users without them even having to worry about that. > Great idea! [1] http://git.cryptocrack.de/aur.git/log/?h=git-integration
