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."

Comments

Davros, is that you?

[nategoose]

Reread the summary in Davros's voice, in creasing the volume and excitement as you get closer to the end. Come on -- it'll be fun.

Re:Davros, is that you?

[Tetsujin]

Reread the summary in Davros's voice, in creasing the volume and excitement as you get closer to the end. Come on -- it'll be fun.

What happens when you crease volume and excitement? Is it like one of those Mad fold-ins? Like it'll work out to be "volent" or "exume" or something?

Re:Davros, is that you?

[sesshomaru]

Here's a clip for an example, for those unfamiliar:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7026801162637347552&ei=eyc4SdWjOoL8rAKQiLiTDg&q=genesis+of+the+daleks+davros

This is why people don't take you seriously.

[Anonymous Coward]

The hyperbole makes you look like a frothing idiot.

Re:This is why people don't take you seriously.

[__aasqbs9791]

Well, I'm like an idiot-savant. Except for the savant part. So I guess the frothing part.

Serve Documentation from GitTorrent

[ooglek]

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.

Re:Serve Documentation from GitTorrent

[ooglek]

Hmm. Except that the problem of SQlite being updated by two or more people at the same time would create problems. Unless BugIDs were md5 hashes, an insert would likely cause problems. And even md5 hashes have collisions, though pretty unlikely even if you have 100,000 bugs.

Re:Serve Documentation from GitTorrent

[Beached]

Use a GUID instead. There is an RFC http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4122.txt and its the same algorithm Microsoft uses. It's pretty much guaranteed to be unique if everyone follows the same process. They're used everywhere.

Re:Serve Documentation from GitTorrent

[lkcl]

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.

no - you're not :) read the article: it mentions that static content such as that generated by ikiwiki could perfectly well be generated by a locally-checked-out (gittorrent-distributed) copy of the documentation

extend that concept a little further (one step at a time!) and you have, as you rightly mention:

a standard for hosting the documentation website. IE PHP + SQlite + GitTorrent docRoot == Distributed website.

yes! although, to be much better, technically, you'd have a distributed SQL server - a peer-to-peer SQL server. there's a project that IngreSQL are keeping an eye on, called "d", that might show some promise, here.

Could even contain Trac or something, so all the bug tracking is also in the GitTorrent repository.

yes!

_now_ you're getting it :)

Re:Serve Documentation from GitTorrent

[PouletFou]

From TFA : The possibilities that GitTorrent opens up are just mind-blowing. Here are a few: * Imagine that an entire project - its web site, documentation, wiki, bug-tracker, source code and binaries are all managed and stored in a peer-to-peer distributed git repository. o To view the web site, you either go to the main site, http://web-site.org/ or, if you are offline or want faster access, you go to the locally checked out copy.

Re:Serve Documentation from GitTorrent

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, thats why there are no comments in the linux kernel

<ducks>

Re:Serve Documentation from GitTorrent

[SanityInAnarchy]

Using sqlite would probably not work very well.

For issue tracking, a better example would be ditz, which stores issues as plain text. YAML, actually, but close enough. Thus, rather than thinking about this whole separate layer of SQL transactions, you deal with changes to the bug tracker with the same tools you use for managing the code.

For instance, rather than Trac's retarded behavior of refusing to let you modify an issue when someone else already has (and refusing to let you see their changes without opening a new tab), you'd let Git try to merge them, and fix it manually if necessary.

PHP would not be a good idea, either, unless it was very well secured -- you'd probably want static files for your wiki, or a safer templating language (Markdown, etc). In fact, no need to make it a wiki -- again, just keep it flat, and use git as the mechanism for distributing changes.

Re:Serve Documentation from GitTorrent

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't get it. How does this really make the development process any more free?

Well, let's see... the repo is no longer in a single place, it's all over the place. One might conclude that removing access to such a repository might become slightly more difficult, with the proliferation of wifi, and the soon-to-be mesh networking. This has awe-inspiring possibilities for world freedom, nevermind simply software freedom.

If you ask me....

[Chris Mattern]

...there's too many gits on the internet *now*...

Why?

[Rix]

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).

Re:Why?

[lkcl]

The primary purpose of peer to peer systems are to either avoid censorship or provide lots of cheap/free bandwidth.

the primary purposes _now_ are to avoid censorship and to provide lots of cheap/free bandwidth.

the last major upgrade of debian REDLINED the world's internet backbone infrastructure for a WEEK.

with the total linux usage only being - what... 1% of the world's desktop systems, and debian being a small fraction of that, the debian mirror system are ALREADY creaking under the load.

Neither of these really apply to source code management.

why not?

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).

i don't _want_ "sponsorship". i don't _want_ my pet project hosted by a large corporation. i want it completely independent.

i want my web site content hosted and automatically mirrored across the world, along with its bugs database and its wiki all linked together.

i want people in the emerging markets and the third world to be able to have exactly the same kind of luxury that we do - and they DO NOT have "continuous access to the web site or access to the lovely sponsored hosting".

think much bigger and you will start to see why this is so damn important.

It amuses me

[Reality Master 201]

The hyperventilation notwithstanding, what amuses me most is the fact that the project is currently hosted at Google Code.

Try meditation or something.

Re:Not going to change much

[GCsoftware]

This is a problem in search of a solution.

I believe you meant "solution in search of a problem."

if your product is so useful

[circletimessquare]

you don't need the hype. linking it to the downfall of vista makes us laugh at you

just describe what it does, dryly, concisely, technically. if it is worthy of the hype, we will supply the hype for you

but when you supply the hype, we are inclined to believe there's not much really going on with your project. which might not be true. so change your tone, for your own sake

Re:if your product is so useful

[Jamie's Nightmare]

What you did was take a boring description and dumped in two whopping spoonfuls of hype. As if that wasn't enough, you put a spiteful cherry on top of the Slashdot submission.

This was my favorite part:

A government or an organisation decides that it doesn't want free software to be used, as it undermines their ability to exert "control".

Great. Not only do I have to worry about Chemtrails and controlled demolition conveniently disguised as terrorism, now I learn the government might want to keep me from getting my free copy of KOffice.

What exactly have you been smoking?

[Anonymous Coward]

Coming just in time for that all-encompassing Free Software revolution hinted at by The Rebellion Against Vista

Can you also point me to where the rainbow-powered unicorn factories are? I imagine they probably exist in the world you seem to live in, you insufferable twit.

Rebellion you say?

[Jamie's Nightmare]

I would rather see a rebellion on Slashdot against articles that announced FOSS news as if it was predicting the second coming of Christ.

This story is in no way related the the Microsoft's (perceived) loss in market share, not to mention the fact that those who are dropping windows are moving to Apple, not Linux. But hey, gotta go for every low blow you can get while the news is still fresh, right?

Re:Not going to change much

[TheRaven64]

If it involves Git and Bittorrent then I suspect it is actually "two problems in search of a problem".

Re:Piracy

[compro01]

Observe the Ubuntu website this coming April when they release a new version and see if you still feel that a website is appropriate to the task. The site gets hammered so hard that it's problematic to even get the .torrent files directly from them, nevermind the ISOs, and it's not feasible to have that kind of bandwidth sitting around unused except for a few days every 6 months, nor is it currently feasible to get that much bandwidth on-demand for a website, but bittorrent allows for just that, as you're pooling the bandwidth of everyone downloading it. You can easily gets amounts of bandwidth that would cost tens of thousands of dollars to have in a conventional manner.

Debian GPG-signed Web of Trust

[lkcl]

debian has a keysigning process that creates a web of trust.

http://www.chaosreigns.com/code/sig2dot/debian.html
http://www.debian.org/events/keysigning

Dead project

[nniillss]

Status, according to the project site, http://code.google.com/p/gittorrent/: Currently no-one is actively developing either this developed version or Jonas' C++ implementation.

The last project entries/downloads are from February 2008. Why such a hype over a dead/dormant project?

Re:Dead project

[shutdown -p now]

So, how about truthfully saying that in TFA, instead of blathering about the winds of change and the impending revolution?