Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

git-fat should support a way to guess fat store URLs #57

Open
OptiverTimAll opened this issue May 27, 2015 · 0 comments
Open

git-fat should support a way to guess fat store URLs #57

OptiverTimAll opened this issue May 27, 2015 · 0 comments

Comments

@OptiverTimAll
Copy link

I've been investigating git large-file storage solutions, and while git-fat is more generally useful, GitHub's git-lfs is a bit nicer to use. One reason is that you don't always have to explicitly tell it where your external file-storage is; if you're using GitHub Enterprise, the file-storage URL is at a predictable location relative to the upstream repo URL. This is not the case for git-fat in general, but it is probably true for most people using git-fat within an organisation.

I want to be able to put rewrite rules into ~/.gitconfig that git-fat can use to find the fat store. For example, if I run git clone ssh://git@git/repos/myproject.git on my workstation, I may know that the fat store is always going to be rsync://git@storage/git-fat/myproject and set up a rewrite rule accordingly.

Following the example of remote.<name>.fetch, such a rewrite rule might look like:

[git-fat-rewrite "common projects"]
    clone_url = ssh://git@git/repos/*.git
    storage_url = rsync://git@storage/git-fat/*

Alternatively, following the example of url.<base>.insteadOf, such a rewrite rule might look like:

[git-fat-storage "ssh://git@git/repos"]
    pull = rsync://git@storage/git-fat

Those aren't the only two options, of course; just starting-points for discussion.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants