[20:17] so um [20:17] have we thought about adding https support for bazaar.launchpad.net at all? [21:33] mwhudson, i thought we do have it.... please elaborate? [21:34] xnox: not for accessing bzr branches over https we don't [21:34] i think? [21:34] there is for codebrowse [21:36] ah [21:47] mwhudson: the chances of any development that substantial happening on bzr codehosting are relatively slim [21:47] cjwatson: it's mostly ops isn't it? but yeah [21:48] cjwatson: this is what prompted it https://groups.google.com/d/msg/golang-nuts/bY5qSPjBUCk/FkkAujU2AQAJ [21:48] it's slightly embarrassing [21:49] sure - we do have it on git.launchpad.net [21:58] mwhudson: It's complicated due to domain arrangements and security. [21:58] wgrant: bleh ok [21:59] i don't really see why but i'm sure the details are horrible :-) [21:59] mwhudson: Users holding SFTP access to a subdomain of a webapp is a Very Bad Idea™. [21:59] We are saved today only by the Secure bit on our cookies. [22:00] oh [22:00] i guess we could turn off sftp but i guess the smart server provides broadly equivalent abilities? [22:02] Correct. [22:02] VFS access can't readily be eliminated. [22:03] It is possible to fix at the web server level, but the security considerations are complicated and we certainly don't have time for that now. [22:04] Good excuse to encourage Go projects hosted on Launchpad to switch to git.launchpad.net on general principles. [22:04] (which I realise is a little unhelpful, but aligned with general goals ...) [22:06] can't decide whether to reply and say that or just ignore it and hope it goes away