Slashdot Mirror
Political and Technical Implications of GitTorrent
lkcl writes "The GitTorrent
Protocol (GTP) is a protocol for collaborative
git repository distribution across the Internet.
Git
promises to be a distributed software management tool, where a repository
can be distributed. Yet, the mechanisms used to date to actually
'distribute,' such as ssh, are very much still centralized.
GitTorrent makes
Git truly distributed. The initial plans are for reducing mirror
loading, however the full plans include totally distributed development:
no central mirrors whatsoever. PGP signing (an existing feature of git)
and other web-of-trust-based mechanisms will take over from protocols on ports
(e.g. ssh) as the access control 'clearing house.'
The implications of a truly distributed revision control system are
truly staggering: unrestricted software freedom. The playing field
is leveled in so many ways, as 'The Web Site' no longer becomes the
central choke-point of control. Coming just in time for that
all-encompassing Free Software revolution hinted at by
The Rebellion Against Vista,
this article will explain more fully
some of the implications that make this quiet and technically
brilliant project, GitTorrent,
so important to Software Freedom, from both technical and
political perspectives."
This is cool, your code can be free. But unfortunately you're still stuck with hosting the documentation on a central website of some sort. I'm hopeful someone will whip up a standard for hosting the documentation website. IE PHP + SQlite + GitTorrent docRoot == Distributed website. Now several websites could support any GitTorrent-hosted documentation. Go to any GitTorrentDoc-enabled website, type in the .torrent of the repository, and blam -- the server pulls it down (or has it already cached) and you can page through the fully-dynamic docRoot. Could even contain Trac or something, so all the bug tracking is also in the GitTorrent repository.
TossableDigits.com: Temporary Phone Numb
The primary purpose of peer to peer systems are to either avoid censorship or provide lots of cheap/free bandwidth.
Neither of these really apply to source code management. Hosting is easily sponsored and the files aren't very big anyway. Few projects will face censorship anywhere other than the most regressive regimes (ie, China or the US).
The hyperventilation notwithstanding, what amuses me most is the fact that the project is currently hosted at Google Code.
Try meditation or something.
BitTorrent Trademark Guidelines: "Misleading or Confusing People. If you are using any of our trademarks in a way that will cause people to get the wrong idea about BitTorrent's involvement in something, you should stop! If you have some reason why you think your proposed use isn't misleading or confusing, let's talk."
Belief is the currency of delusion.
I'd be ok as long as you have the right keys..
Question is, how do you know which keys are trustworthy...
Not at all.
Git is a means of sharing and tracking changes to source code for a software project. Formerly, you needed a central server to do that. Now, with GitTorrent, it can be distributed among individual machines.
GitTorrent is designed to lower the bar for starting a multi-person software project, making it easier and cheaper for developers to collaborate with each other.
As a side effect, since there's no central server, it will be difficult for an authority to take down or block GitTorrent projects. I suspect GitTorrent will be popular with people developing software that is politically or legally troublesome in their country.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
It might currently come across as a solution looking for a problem - and as one smart-ass with admin rights to the Google Code project reminds you on the source tab, "more alpha than the greek letter". The initial motivation was performance of downloads and in particular reducing load on kernel.org.
Not convinced this is a good idea yet? Oh don't worry it goes on:
That's one reason d'etre, but to those who argue that is insufficient justification for its existence, that Git is already fast enough - it is a first step towards applying decentralizing Peer to Peer concepts to Git.
BTW, an excellent way to convince someone a project really doesn't have a "reason d'etre" is insisting it has multiple "reason d'etre"s.
If you decentralize the download layer, it's just another small step before you decentralize the push rights and tie it to a web of trust such as PGP, and then you don't actually need discrete mirror sites. Every mirror can track the git repositories the owners want it to carry, and those authorized to sign updates can make signed updates to push the cloud forward.
You had me at performance and distributing bandwidth costs, and probably should have stopped there. Changing ownership of a project from those who control "The Web Site" to those "authorized to sign updates" doesn't do much for me.
And srly, "central choke-point of control"? As the parent suggested, can't just fork and start a project on source forge or google code?
because it's the *only* project that links git with a p2p protocol. so, i'm interested in seeing it revived.