From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Clarification on the git+ssh and ssh+git schemes Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 14:30:27 -0500 Message-ID: <20160205193027.GC7245@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <62DF0D5B-83DF-465D-9786-A4E7DA97F2BA@dwim.me> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Carlos =?utf-8?Q?Mart=C3=ADn?= Nieto X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Feb 05 20:30:35 2016 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 1aRm5S-0007GA-Dp for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2016 20:30:34 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753714AbcBETaa convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Feb 2016 14:30:30 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:38317 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753082AbcBETa3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Feb 2016 14:30:29 -0500 Received: (qmail 29310 invoked by uid 102); 5 Feb 2016 19:30:29 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Fri, 05 Feb 2016 14:30:29 -0500 Received: (qmail 17496 invoked by uid 107); 5 Feb 2016 19:30:29 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Fri, 05 Feb 2016 14:30:29 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 05 Feb 2016 14:30:27 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <62DF0D5B-83DF-465D-9786-A4E7DA97F2BA@dwim.me> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 09:33:06AM -0800, Carlos Mart=C3=ADn Nieto wrot= e: > git supports using git+ssh:// and ssh+git:// instead of ssh:// or the > rsync-style format. The first two are however not documented in the > git-clone manage as acceptable protocols (which is what I think of as > the canonical source for what you can use). There are tests to make > sure these are supported, but even the commit that allows for this > (c05186cc; Support git+ssh:// and ssh+git:// URL) makes it pretty > clear it=E2=80=99s not something that=E2=80=99s considered sensible. Hrm. I tried to find more discussion on the list, but I couldn't find any mention of git+ssh, nor of that patch. I wonder if there is a hole in my archive, or if they were done off-list for some reason. Anyway... > But in either case, if we=E2=80=99re going to support it, it should b= e > documented. If we don=E2=80=99t want to support it, then we should de= lete the > references to these formats along with the tests for this. Whether they are stupid or not (and I agree that they are), we cannot just rip them out now without warning. And given that they are probably not costing us a lot in maintenance burden to keep, I'd guess it is les= s effort to simply leave them in place. I suspect they were not really documented because nobody wanted to encourage their use. I don't think it would be wrong to document that they exist and are deprecated, though. > I=E2=80=99m happy to write a patch going in either direction, but I=E2= =80=99d like > some input from the community as to what we want to do. I imagine your ulterior motive is also figuring out whether libgit2 needs to support them? -Peff