From: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@gmail.com>
To: "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Cc: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] doc/gitremote-helpers: match object-format option docs to code
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 10:41:24 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87msqzo63f.fsf@gmail.froward.int.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZfNqVowQBy47_92m@tapette.crustytoothpaste.net> (brian m. carlson's message of "Thu, 14 Mar 2024 21:21:26 +0000")
"brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> writes:
> On 2024-03-14 at 12:47:16, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> That said I think a lot of think we do a lot of that today in practice
>> by simply detecting the length of the hash.
>
> That's only true for the dumb HTTP protocol. Everything else should not
> do that and we specifically want to avoid doing that, since we may very
> well end up with SHA-3-256 or another 256-bit hash instead of SHA-256 if
> there are sufficient cryptographic advances.
My apologies. I thought Jeff King was reporting that object-format
extension did not work, and that had been masked by a test.
I see you saying and a quick grep through the code supports that the
object-format extension is implemented, and that the primary problem
is that the Documentation varies slightly from what is implemented.
Looking at the code I am left with the question:
Is the object-format extension properly implemented in all cases?
If the object-format extension is properly implemented such that a
client and server mismatch can be detected I am for just Documenting
what is currently implemented and calling it good.
The reason for that is
Documentation/technical/hash-function-transition.txt does not expect
servers to support more than hash function. I don't have a perspective
that differs. So detecting what the client and server support and
failing if they differ should be good enough.
I am concerned that the current code may not report it's hash function
in all of the cases it needs to, to be able to detect a mismatch.
I look at commit 8b85ee4f47aa ("transport-helper: implement
object-format extensions") and I don't see anything that generates
":object-format=" after it has been asked for except the code
in remote-curl.c added in commit 7f60501775b2 ("remote-curl: implement
object-format extensions").
Maybe I am mistaken but a name like remote-curl has me strongly
suspecting that it does not cover all of the cases that git supports
that implement protocol v2.
I think I see some omissions in updating the protocol v2 Documentation.
Can some folks who understand how git protocol v2 is implemented better
that I do, tell me if I am seeing things or if it indeed looks like
there are some omissions in the object-format implementation?
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-15 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-07 8:47 [RFC/PATCH 0/2] some transport-helper "option object-format" confusion Jeff King
2024-03-07 8:51 ` [PATCH 1/2] t5801: fix object-format handling in git-remote-testgit Jeff King
2024-03-07 8:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] doc/gitremote-helpers: match object-format option docs to code Jeff King
2024-03-07 22:20 ` brian m. carlson
2024-03-12 7:45 ` Jeff King
2024-03-13 21:11 ` brian m. carlson
2024-03-14 12:47 ` Eric W. Biederman
2024-03-14 21:21 ` brian m. carlson
2024-03-15 15:41 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2024-03-16 6:04 ` Jeff King
2024-03-17 20:47 ` Eric W. Biederman
2024-03-18 8:49 ` Jeff King
2024-03-14 15:33 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-03-14 21:54 ` brian m. carlson
2024-03-20 9:32 ` [PATCH 0/3] some transport-helper "option object-format" confusion Jeff King
2024-03-20 9:34 ` [PATCH 1/3] transport-helper: use write helpers more consistently Jeff King
2024-03-20 9:37 ` [PATCH 2/3] transport-helper: drop "object-format <algo>" option Jeff King
2024-03-20 9:41 ` [PATCH 3/3] transport-helper: send "true" value for object-format option Jeff King
2024-03-20 17:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-03-20 17:05 ` [PATCH 0/3] some transport-helper "option object-format" confusion Eric W. Biederman
2024-03-27 9:48 ` Jeff King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87msqzo63f.fsf@gmail.froward.int.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).