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=-3.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_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 710B81F404 for ; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 23:46:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932102AbeCLXqy (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Mar 2018 19:46:54 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:54746 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751333AbeCLXqx (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Mar 2018 19:46:53 -0400 Received: (qmail 13956 invoked by uid 109); 12 Mar 2018 23:46:53 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 23:46:53 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 19124 invoked by uid 111); 12 Mar 2018 23:47:46 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) SMTP; Mon, 12 Mar 2018 19:47:46 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 12 Mar 2018 19:46:51 -0400 Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 19:46:51 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Jonathan Nieder Cc: Brandon Williams , git@vger.kernel.org, sbeller@google.com, gitster@pobox.com, stolee@gmail.com, git@jeffhostetler.com, pclouds@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 12/35] serve: introduce git-serve Message-ID: <20180312234651.GA2137@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20180125235838.138135-1-bmwill@google.com> <20180207011312.189834-1-bmwill@google.com> <20180207011312.189834-13-bmwill@google.com> <20180222093327.GA12442@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20180223214557.GF234838@google.com> <20180303043338.GC27689@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20180305184321.GC72475@google.com> <20180305205254.GC5953@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20180305213649.GF28067@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> <20180306062901.GA3522@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180306062901.GA3522@sigill.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 07:29:02AM +0100, Jeff King wrote: > > We want to do better (e.g. see [1]) but that's a bigger change than > > the initial protocol v2. > > > > As Brandon explained it to me, we really do want to use stateless-rpc > > semantics by default, since that's just better for maintainability. > > Instead of having two protocols, one that is sane and one that > > struggles to hoist that into stateless-rpc, there would be one > > stateless baseline plus capabilities to make use of state. > > Yes, I think that would be a nice end-game. It just wasn't clear to me > where we'd be in the interim. After some more thinking about this, and a little chatting with Brandon at the contrib summit, I'm willing to soften my position on this. Basically I was concerned about this as a regression where git-over-ssh would stop working in a few corner cases. And it would cease to be available as an escape hatch for those cases where http wouldn't work. But we may be OK in this "interim" period (before unified stateful-negotiation bits are added back) because v2 would not yet be the default. So the ssh cases can't regress without flipping the v2 switch manually, and any escape hatch would continue to work by flipping back to v1 anyway. So it's probably OK to continue experimenting in this direction and see how often it's a problem in practice. -Peff