On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 4:39 PM, Jeff Mitchell <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 2/2/2010 3:43 AM, Marius Mårnes Mathiesen wrote: > > Not that I know of, but you are seemingly not alone in wanting this. The > > reason why we haven't developed this as part of gitorious.org > > <http://gitorious.org> is that gitorious.org <http://gitorious.org> > > really is for F/OSS projects. But I see no reason why gitorious (the > > application) couldn't be used for such purposes. > > I would also really like this ability -- and in fact, since we're using > it at work, I'm *trying* to push some people where I work to fund you > guys to work on it. No promises whatsoever and don't get your hopes up, > but maybe something will work out. > Now that would be cool :-) > But you guys have your own git-daemon that is run. Such access control > could be coded into this, correct? > Actually, to my knowledge, the git protocol itself lacks authentication support; it is designed for fast read access to repositories. > > - HTTP cloning also does not require authentication, and would work > > similarly > > I haven't used HTTP cloning in gitorious; I would imagine that it > shouldn't be hard to turn off (or to filter out the relevant paths in > Apache itself, via access control or URL rewriting). > Access control in HTTP is absolutely possible; and since the HTTP cloning in Gitorious still hits the Rails app adding authentication support is doable. For read access, however, HTTP is mainly intended for scenarios where there are restrictions on which ports are open (firewalls), which would probably be that much of an issue in custom installs. Newer versions of git actually have much improved HTTP support; it is faster and supports writing (ie push). So HTTP is a real alternative to SSH these days, as long as the users have recent Git clients. - Marius -- To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]
