Google Summer of Code: Encrypted branch/repository format status

[Martin Pool]

On 7/17/07, John Arbash Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Bogdano Arendartchuk wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm working on the encrypted repository and branch format for Bazaar.
> >
> > Currently I'm coding a repository format that is intended to write in the
> > disk all the data slightly scrambled. This is a protype and nothing is
> > encrypted at all, the objective is to know better the Bazaar code/design
> > and also plan what can be reused and what should be reimplemented in order
> > to fit the application needs.

The other question in my mind is whether this really needs to come in
at the knit level.  Could you instead interpose an encrypting
transport for access to some files?  I realize random access may be a
bit hard to get just right, but that's probably no worse than for
doing it in a knit... The transport interface is pretty stable.

And we really should add the same tests I did for DirState. Such that if we can
> import _knit_load_data_c, then knit._load_data should be the right function.
> (Modulo any naming changes).
>
> It also brings up the thought of what we should name the extension module,
> since the name is now changing. We could do "_knit_helpers" to be closer to
> _dirstate_helpers (which is also better if we add more extension functions).

That sounds reasonable - what was it in your current code?
-- 
Martin