From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: remote#branch Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:58:23 -0400 Message-ID: <20071030235823.GA22747@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20071030044026.GA9600@thunk.org> <20071030053732.GA16963@hermes.priv> <20071030160232.GB2640@hermes.priv> <4727839B.9070205@obry.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Pascal Obry , Matthieu Moy , Tom Prince , Theodore Tso , Junio C Hamano , Jan Hudec , Johannes Schindelin , Petr Baudis , Paolo Ciarrocchi , git@vger.kernel.org To: Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Oct 31 00:58:57 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1In0z2-0006aG-5W for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:58:56 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753923AbXJ3X62 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:58:28 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753198AbXJ3X62 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:58:28 -0400 Received: from 66-23-211-5.clients.speedfactory.net ([66.23.211.5]:2479 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754022AbXJ3X61 (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:58:27 -0400 Received: (qmail 6056 invoked by uid 111); 30 Oct 2007 23:58:25 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with SMTP; Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:58:25 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 30 Oct 2007 19:58:23 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Oct 30, 2007 at 12:38:27PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > So if you want to follow the RFC, you'd better give a real reason. And no, > the existence of an RFC, and the fact that people use the same name for > things that superficially _look_ the same is not a reason in itself. > > So hands up, people. Anybody who asked for RFC quoting. Give a damn > *reason* already! I didn't ask for RFC quoting, but a nice side effect of URL syntax is that they are machine parseable. If you wanted to write a tool to pick the URLs out of this email and clone them as git repos, then how do you find the end of: http://host/git repo with spaces in the path compared to: http://host/git+repo+with+spaces+in+the+path I don't know if that's worth changing anything in git (in fact, I'm not even clear on _what_ people want to change; the point of this discussion seems to be to argue about terminology). But you did ask for any reason for quoting URLs. -Peff