8656afd3e1
"http" was too generic and easy to confuse with web. The new name makes clear it's used in addition to some other remote. And other protocols can use the same naming scheme.
19 lines
828 B
Markdown
19 lines
828 B
Markdown
Many special remotes can potentially end up exposed in public http. There
|
|
is not currently a way to access them over http, without adding per-remote
|
|
support (like S3 has).
|
|
|
|
But generally the filenames used are the same, eg rsync and directory and
|
|
webdav and S3. Or if there are differences, they are generally small and
|
|
trying a couple of different urls is doable.
|
|
|
|
And sameas allows for
|
|
<https://git-annex.branchable.com/tips/multiple_remotes_accessing_the_same_data_store/>
|
|
now.
|
|
|
|
So, there could be a new special remote type, that allows generic readonly
|
|
access of other special remotes whose data stores are exposed via http.
|
|
|
|
Call it "http" maybe. (There may be some confusion between this and the web
|
|
special remote by users looking for such a thing.) --[[Joey]]
|
|
|
|
> httpalso special remote implemented, [[done]] --[[Joey]]
|