1 |
On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 11:20:56AM -0400, Alec Warner wrote: |
2 |
> Brian Harring wrote: |
3 |
> Mostly was looking at a unified transport lib, with connection |
4 |
> abstractions, which is basically what we have now, but lacks SCP/RSYNC |
5 |
> support, and I think people would want that functionality, Remote repos |
6 |
> with rsync for proto fex. That way the remote repo code only depends on |
7 |
> Transports and all the proto mess is abstracted away. Maybe just keep |
8 |
> em seperate and copy the rsync code? I kind of like the single vs multi |
9 |
> approach now that I think about it more :P |
10 |
Unifying the actual 'transports' crap into transports would make |
11 |
sense, although I'd still posit a wrapper layer over whatever |
12 |
transport layer in use would be required; iow, transports/rsync, but |
13 |
sync/rsync still that imports portage.transports.rsync .. |
14 |
~harring |