From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF44A208DB for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 17:36:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757400AbdHYRgd (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2017 13:36:33 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:49324 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1755568AbdHYRgc (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2017 13:36:32 -0400 Received: (qmail 1271 invoked by uid 109); 25 Aug 2017 17:36:32 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 17:36:32 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 20146 invoked by uid 111); 25 Aug 2017 17:37:00 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.1.3) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 13:37:00 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:36:27 -0700 Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:36:27 -0700 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Stefan Beller , Brandon Williams , "git@vger.kernel.org" , Jonathan Nieder , Jonathan Tan Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] transitioning to protocol v2 Message-ID: <20170825173627.gic5gdu7dv7zxucj@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20170824225328.8174-1-bmwill@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 10:14:13AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Stefan Beller writes: > > > For now I would suggest we put a protocol v2 in place that is > > the current protocol + a version number coming through the > > poked hole at the beginning; the goal and review of this series > > ought to focus on getting the version handshake right... > > Oh, we are in absolute agreement on that. It would be nice if we > can have new tests to demonostrate three combinations working well > (i.e. use 'installed git' whose path is given externally on one end > of the connection, while the just-built binary sits on the other > end, in addition to making sure just-built binary successfully talks > with itself). The harness in t/interop can perhaps help with that (at least between existing git versions; testing across other implementations makes the setup a lot tricker). -Peff