From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] remote-curl: let users turn off smart http Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:12:31 -0400 Message-ID: <20120920181231.GA19204@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20120920165938.GB18655@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20120920170517.GB18981@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7va9wkbmyc.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: "Shawn O. Pearce" , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Sep 20 20:12:43 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TElEw-0005JO-Op for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2012 20:12:43 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753539Ab2ITSMe (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:12:34 -0400 Received: from 75-15-5-89.uvs.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([75.15.5.89]:51665 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753333Ab2ITSMd (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:12:33 -0400 Received: (qmail 18355 invoked by uid 107); 20 Sep 2012 18:12:59 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:12:59 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:12:31 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7va9wkbmyc.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 10:53:15AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > I added the config item as remote.foo.smarthttp. You could also allow > > "http.$url.smart" (and just "http.smart", for that matter), which could > > be more flexible if you have multiple remotes pointing to the same > > broken server. > > What would the user experience be when we introduce "even smarter" > http server protocol extension? Will we add remote.foo.starterhttp? I would hope that it would actually be negotiated reliably at the protocol level so we do not have to deal with this mess again. > Perhaps > > remote.$name.httpvariants = [smart] [dumb] > > to allow users to say "smart only", "dumb only", or "smart and/or > dumb" might be more code but less burden on the users. I don't mind that format if we are going that direction, but is there anybody who actually wants to say "smart only?" -Peff