From a27861c512bcf5808c59d9bc2b38c80b559d6d69 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~willu/" Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2009 03:13:25 -0400 Subject: Comment on another possible solution to the use case. --- doc/plugins/contrib/rsync/discussion.mdwn | 11 +++++++++++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) (limited to 'doc/plugins/contrib/rsync') diff --git a/doc/plugins/contrib/rsync/discussion.mdwn b/doc/plugins/contrib/rsync/discussion.mdwn index a2c2eb725..b2d21e6d5 100644 --- a/doc/plugins/contrib/rsync/discussion.mdwn +++ b/doc/plugins/contrib/rsync/discussion.mdwn @@ -25,3 +25,14 @@ As a proof of concept, I added an rsync post-commit hook after ikiwiki's usual. It worked, just not for web edits, which is how the wiki will be used. So I wrote this plugin to finish the job. The wiki now lives on (1), and clicking "edit" just works. + +> Just out of interest, why use `rsync` and not `git push`. i.e. a +> different setup to solve the same problem would be to run a +> normal ikiwiki setup on the universities server with its git +> repository available over ssh (same security setup your using +> for rsync should work for git over ssh). On the cgi-capable server, +> when it would rsync, make it git push. It would seem that git +> has enough information that it should be able to be more +> network efficient. It also means that corruption at one end +> wouldn't be propagated to the other end. -- [[Will]] + -- cgit v1.2.3