Hi Ævar, On Mon, 5 Nov 2018, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> The only potential downside I see is that there's currently exactly one > implementation of this sort of thing in the wild, so we risk any such > API becoming too tied up with just what GVFS wants, and not what we'd > like to support with such a thing in general. This is what e.g. the w3c > tries to avoid with having multiple browser implementations before > something is standardized. It is my understanding that Ben is quite interested in ideas how to make this *not* tied up with VFSforGit. I'd think that he would welcome any good ideas you have in that direction. Ciao, Dscho
