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=-2.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no 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 A1CF6208DB for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 18:55:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755492AbdHYSzJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2017 14:55:09 -0400 Received: from mail-pg0-f50.google.com ([74.125.83.50]:33819 "EHLO mail-pg0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754717AbdHYSzI (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2017 14:55:08 -0400 Received: by mail-pg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id a7so3470511pgn.1 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 11:55:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=PGFVk1niufUX0AOHaGBNfo/loLnY8Er3JL1iATIGSyc=; b=t8x1d7DFORwU2WoMDCCLDoaZ4xiK17A7csDG5rlr1+QYr2tXIN8CCLgzWZqH+qC2jO 3ZZmajcumkjg5NBrG2Dii8zjKMy3vq+nnazXEqRBunw5d3CFBxqdvrVKxSKPlnirs5cw 2f+c2PeZ7XZU77QoQ+01G7CtwOG3aIbOlRXWuCTDmcLjwwM3YvzB7NORyIh+/UHRud1V 506jvS6eZuJTfrwENHIXrD49UZz+b7VBdBt6yngAfVgJzIyMrw8A4COHqYiC+raUH7UN K1ASbx6QIzX8wvipKhm+mRhL7b02G5GYsmWeVBPhaVOwVjMyvNvum4ORrNDQOBOS+4ui RmBQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=PGFVk1niufUX0AOHaGBNfo/loLnY8Er3JL1iATIGSyc=; b=G7SxY+M/zZR8tL+woVGAsw4DOolznk6DkrNmH6wjIc+W63gx6UHOKLHsmxKkP3AVLv SKm08BOznW3y1TDEVFw5t+ToGaCYvUXadbJ75WaBD/Hdyj3jyMwXVrpfpRXHU+Cob3EL u89hGLA3u1WHDTyysKjfRS/BH40RWckCIg+bP1dKgP6Wux5qq96WzKobdd+WaUfB59h7 eZ+Wj3BtTdXWp9DEvSisRr8993XUiDGveVyPRlh0cpe89VJVQEaDaL+zyhf4XaNnGlcW ReNvxwENC4uuZ6SCVjtgxig8/Fg68mRhCMiu5OpSikhidxsZQLUdSebUpxt9MQ/2WxkE KE7w== X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5gPV0ej2wrCfOXxeVKlu7xoxZdrzLpoY+nhbkd2SaSEbPjQYWds FB5t+0ZbN2wL6cyi X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADKCNb4O2B7TwmH8rNQwzYnslRgE59byeBLhb2wsTxnKBu7AaFlKlWr+PnJwAyK7XM29OpSJ34yjwA== X-Received: by 10.84.229.136 with SMTP id c8mr11758710plk.27.1503687308307; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 11:55:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2620:0:100e:422:f5e9:c606:d78a:b54a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q185sm11978338pfb.119.2017.08.25.11.55.06 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 25 Aug 2017 11:55:07 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2017 11:55:06 -0700 From: Brandon Williams To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, peff@peff.net, jrnieder@gmail.com, sbeller@google.com, jonathantanmy@google.com Subject: Re: [RFC 3/7] protocol: tell server that the client understands v2 Message-ID: <20170825185506.GC103659@google.com> References: <20170824225328.8174-1-bmwill@google.com> <20170824225328.8174-4-bmwill@google.com> <20170825185321.GB103659@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170825185321.GB103659@google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 08/25, Brandon Williams wrote: > On 08/25, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Brandon Williams writes: > > > > > + /* If using a new version put that stuff here after a second null byte */ > > > + strbuf_addch(&request, '\0'); > > > + strbuf_addf(&request, "version=%d%c", 2, '\0'); > > > + /* subsequent supported versions can also be added */ > > > + strbuf_addf(&request, "version=%d%c", 3, '\0'); > > > > Isn't this last one meant only as a comment? > > Sorry since this was structured as an RFC I didn't go back through the > code with a fine tooth comb to ensure I removed or commented out any > debugging statements. Stefan also pointed out to me that I left in an > if (0) statement somewhere haha. Oh one more thing about this line. I added it to show (and check) that git-daemon would be able to cope with more than one field being added as I wanted to avoid the issue we had when adding the 'host' field where additional fields aren't allowed as they aren't gracefully ignored by the server. -- Brandon Williams