[geeklog-devel] geeklog-devel Digest, Vol 26, Issue 30
matt.danger.west at gmail.com
Wed Apr 1 08:45:48 EDT 2009
> Hey Matt and all,
> Here is my revised proposal.. Tell me what you think!
Your proposal is very good, well written, and well organized. You have
covered the project in good detail and I can visualize how it will
operate once completed. I saw you've already submitted it to Melange
per our and Google's requests (thanks!).
A few quick comments:
> Private repositories, on the other hand, only allow specific users
> to upload plugins to the repository.
> [...] As well, private repositories can also limit who is able to
> connect to and download from their repository. This would be
> accomplished by a unique key hash that would be downloaded to an
> approved site, that would log the site in and verify it. These key
> hashes would be stored in the repository database. As mentioned in
> the mailing list, there was some question as to why an administrator
> would require this functionality. In my opinion it is always better
> to allow for new functionality, instead of limiting the potential.
> An administrator may want this functionality because they only want
> to develop a plugin for a friend or for a group of people. However
> this does go against the concept of open source, so it may be better
> not to implement it at all.
I can see the usefulness of a closed repository though I'm not sure it
would be utilized. Dirk, et al, have we received any requests for this
option? I do like the idea of developing with growth in mind, as you
mentioned, so I would recommend developing the repository with this in
mind but leaving the implementation for the "if I have time" part.
> Repositories that contain malicious plugins can be black listed by
> the main Geeklog site. This would work much like Google's
> blacklisting for malicious sites. Users would be able to alert
> Geeklog of malicious repositories, and if Geeklog verified these as
> malicious, would be added to the Blacklist. This list would be
> downloaded every time the plugin manager is started, and if a user
> attempts to install from one of these malicious repositories, they
> would be alerted of the danger, and the reason the site was black
> listed. However they would not be prevented from installing a plugin
> from that repository if they wanted to.
> As well, if they had a blacklisted repository in their repository
> list, a warning would be displayed every time the user started the
> plugin manager, with a request to delete the offending repository
> from the list.
I think that instead of downloading a list every time the plugin
manager is accessed that the blacklist check should occur when a user
is adding a new repository. When they click "add" a request could be
sent to wherever the blacklist is hosted (probably geeklog.net) with
the address of the repository.
> Project Timeline
Double check Google's timeline, I think the SoC is 11-12 weeks. You
may want to add a little more detail here.
So think about my comments and I think your proposal is ready to go
unless any of the other GL devs/mentors have any comments or
As an aside, we've asked students to consider writing a second
proposal for another Geeklog project to help distribute the
application load and increase the student's chance of being accepted.
We have had *no* applications for our Webservices or Cross Site
Publication API projects, are either of those something you might be
interested in working on?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the geeklog-devel