On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 1:44 PM, Oscar Morante <spacep...@gmail.com> wrote: > Have you seen this project [1]? It looks like they have been already > thinking about the git+bittorrent idea. > > [1] http://code.google.com/p/gittorrent/
yes. it's effectively shelved. the name "gittorrent" was abandoned and the name "mirrorsync" selected, because the people working on it decided that bittorrent was an inappropriate protocol to use. i got them some slashdot coverage. but, ultimately, i disagreed with them that bittorrent isn't an appropriate protocol, so that's why i did the thingy and proved that it's an effective transfer / distribution mechanism. thingy. haven't even picked a name for it! :) suggestions welcome. i want to see how far i can get away with leaving the bittorrent protocol _entirely_ unchanged, by virtue of doing everything through this "vfs layer" jobbie. only if it becomes absolutely absolutely necessary, _then_ start making changes. good reasons to make changes: a) the 256k chunk size becomes blindingly obviously completely unacceptable. for example: cameron dale did a study of the .deb archives and found that a very large percentage are under 32k in size. this was the primary reason why he abandoned the bittorrent protocol (baby? bathwater?? *sigh*...) even after modifying it to be able to negotiate chunk sizes and he designed apt-p2p instead. b) ISPs start doing packet-filtering (fuckers) so it becomes necessary to change headers, port numbers, permanently enable encryption at a fundamental level such that deep packet inspection becomes impossible, e.g. move to SSL and so on. c) digital signing of individual commits becomes necessary, and... somehow (i don't know how yet) it *hand-waving* becomes necessary to integrate the GPG signature verification on git "packs" at the bittorrent-protocol-level. haven't got to that bit, yet - the project's only been going for 4 days! sam vilain solved this by simply creating refs with the signers' 32-bit GPG fingerprint, but he didn't get as far as actually _checking_ it :) l. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktikkyhzu_ws7ke3f-ntppdtxy9z6-pgn0pf7m...@mail.gmail.com
