| 1 |
On 12/17/2014 06:20 PM, Zac Medico wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 12/17/2014 03:57 PM, Zac Medico wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 12/17/2014 02:32 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> On Wed, 17 Dec 2014 12:30:53 -0800 |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>>> But what about the different sync types. How do we handle this in a |
| 7 |
>>> git repo instead of an rsync one? |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> I was thinking that we would only need to implement this for the rsync |
| 10 |
>> repo, since that's the only one that includes the glsas. If there's some |
| 11 |
>> reason to implement it for other sync types in the future, then we can |
| 12 |
>> do it when the need arises. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Also, at some point we might introduce a notion of submodules, similar |
| 15 |
> to git submodules, and if necessary each submodule could potentially be |
| 16 |
> synced using a different protocol. However, this is way beyond the |
| 17 |
> present needs. For now, simply extending the rsync module to allow |
| 18 |
> syncing of sub-directories should be sufficient (though I would not |
| 19 |
> expose the ability to sync arbitrary directories through the user |
| 20 |
> interface). |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I did some research, and it appears that we'll be able to do something |
| 23 |
similar for the git module if we make the metadata/glsa directory a git |
| 24 |
submodule. So, it seems that all of our supported sync protocols support |
| 25 |
the possibility of updating individual sub-directories! |
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Thanks, |
| 28 |
Zac |
Archives