web commit by joey

[git.ikiwiki.info.git] / doc / about_rcs_backends.mdwn

diff --git a/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn b/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn
index 547f973e2a3d8d95aa842c9c51ad01f596947cfb..197f093946cee2284f9d3024989309cbf3ac4d36 100644 (file)
--- a/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn
+++ b/doc/about_rcs_backends.mdwn
@@ -1,16 +1,16 @@
-## A few bits about the RCS backends
+# A few bits about the RCS backends

 
 

-### Terminology
+## Terminology

 
 ``web-edit'' means that a page is edited by using the web (CGI) interface
 as opposed to using a editor and the RCS interface.
 
 
 
 ``web-edit'' means that a page is edited by using the web (CGI) interface
 as opposed to using a editor and the RCS interface.
 
 

-### [[Subversion]]
+## [[Subversion]]

 
 

-Subversion was that first RCS to be supported by ikiwiki.
+Subversion was the first RCS to be supported by ikiwiki.

 
 

-#### How does it work internally?
+### How does it work internally?

 
 Master repository M.
 
 
 Master repository M.
 


@@ -22,15 +22,18 @@ HTML is generated from W.  rcs_update() will update from M to W.
 
 CGI operates on W.  rcs_commit() will commit from W to M.
 
 
 CGI operates on W.  rcs_commit() will commit from W to M.
 

+For all the gory details of how ikiwiki handles this behind the scenes,
+see [[commit-internals]].
+

 You browse and web-edit the wiki on W.
 
 
 You browse and web-edit the wiki on W.
 
 

-### [darcs](http://darcs.net/) (not yet included)
+## [darcs](http://darcs.net/) (not yet included)

 
 Support for using darcs as a backend is being worked on by [Thomas
 Schwinge](mailto:tschwinge@gnu.org).
 
 
 Support for using darcs as a backend is being worked on by [Thomas
 Schwinge](mailto:tschwinge@gnu.org).
 

-#### How will it work internally?
+### How will it work internally?

 
 ``Master'' repository R1.
 
 
 ``Master'' repository R1.
 


@@ -45,27 +48,77 @@ There is a working copy of R1: R2.
 CGI operates on R2.  rcs_commit() will push from R2 to R1.
 
 You browse the wiki on R1 and web-edit it on R2.  This means for example
 CGI operates on R2.  rcs_commit() will push from R2 to R1.
 
 You browse the wiki on R1 and web-edit it on R2.  This means for example

-that R2 needs to be updated from R1 if you are going the web-edit a page,
+that R2 needs to be updated from R1 if you are going to web-edit a page,

 as the user otherwise might be irritated otherwise...
 
 How do changes get from R1 to R2?  Currently only internally in
 as the user otherwise might be irritated otherwise...
 
 How do changes get from R1 to R2?  Currently only internally in

-rcs_commit().  Is rcs_prepedit() suitable?
+rcs\_commit().  Is rcs\_prepedit() suitable?

 
 It follows that the HTML rendering and the CGI handling can be completely
 separated parts in ikiwiki.
 
 
 It follows that the HTML rendering and the CGI handling can be completely
 separated parts in ikiwiki.
 

-##### Rationale for doing it differently than in the Subversion case
+What repository should [[RecentChanges]] and [[History]] work on?  R1?
+
+#### Rationale for doing it differently than in the Subversion case

 
 darcs is a distributed RCS, which means that every checkout of a
 repository is equal to the repository it was checked-out from.  There is
 no forced hierarchy.
 
 
 darcs is a distributed RCS, which means that every checkout of a
 repository is equal to the repository it was checked-out from.  There is
 no forced hierarchy.
 

-R1 is the nevertheless called the master repository.  It's used for
+R1 is nevertheless called the master repository.  It's used for

 collecting all the changes and publishing them: on the one hand via the
 rendered HTML and on the other via the standard darcs RCS interface.
 
 collecting all the changes and publishing them: on the one hand via the
 rendered HTML and on the other via the standard darcs RCS interface.
 

-R2, the repository where CGI operates on, is just a checkout of R1 and
+R2, the repository the CGI operates on, is just a checkout of R1 and

 doesn't really differ from the other checkouts that people will branch
 off from R1.
 
 (To be continued.)
 doesn't really differ from the other checkouts that people will branch
 off from R1.
 
 (To be continued.)

+
+
+## [[Git]] (not yet included)
+
+A patch with full [Git](http://git.or.cz) support is at <http://people.debian.org/~roktas/patches/ikiwiki/git.patch>. Regarding the patch, Recai says:
+
+I have been testing it for the past few days and it seems satisfactory.  I
+haven't observed any race condition regarding the concurrent blog commits
+and it handles merge conflicts gracefully as far as I can see.
+
+As you may notice from the patch size, GIT support is not so trivial to
+implement (for me, at least).  Being a fairly fresh code base it has some
+bugs.  It also has some drawbacks (especially wrt merge which was the hard
+part).  GIT doesn't have a similar functionality like 'svn merge -rOLD:NEW
+FILE' (please see the relevant comment in mergepast for more details), so I
+had to invent an ugly hack just for the purpose.
+
+Some other notes:
+
+- There are two separate helper packages in git.pm. To keep things self
+  confined, I haven't split it up.
+
+- I've used a (mini) Debug.pm during the tests and made it a separate file
+  for the convenience of others.  It relies on the "constant folding"
+  feature of Perl, so there shouldn't be a runtime penalty (at least this
+  is what the 'perl -MO=Deparse shows', haven't made a real benchmark).
+
+- rcs_notify() has not been implemented yet (I have noticed it after I
+  finished the main work).
+
+- GIT backend uses the gitweb for repository browsing (the counterpart of
+  ViewCVS).
+
+- There might be some subs in GIT name space which you may prefer to move to
+  the main code.
+
+- Due to the reasons explained in the code, I've written an rcs_invoke()
+  wrapper.  May be there should be a better approach to reach the same
+  goal.
+
+- There are some parts which I may change in future, like using a global
+  rcs_fatal_error and the ugly error reporting code in _rcs_commit.
+
+- Documentation is missing.
+
+It works for me, but of course in the end, the final decision is yours (due
+to mostly GIT quirks, the implementation is not clean as SVN).  Feel free
+to fix/delete/add whatever you want.  Hope it doesn't have any serious bug.