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