From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BF561F4B4 for ; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 19:58:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727231AbgLVT4J (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Dec 2020 14:56:09 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:57825 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726557AbgLVT4J (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Dec 2020 14:56:09 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 263B0A1CCE; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 14:55:28 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=UWtGNocePuMiaOnpLNelS+0/XMo=; b=W/S3+l +HewxhF4Uwb599y71MqVe/YlmqjclZyrzb0hhp+tSeMbtZt4LCER6ht/T78/PpRx xGJtfRFGFd5AWhvwflkkRSdli6rcz+PjVDjmpebZe2T8DwMin/YdfvBex7Q47RVG 7ggT73mrQSK1pjqaf8KomudtiBaWI7sWmDTgw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=JdagOk9OH+Wv+6l7LVnJcvNnV2j2zxq0 FT+ahun2YTYirZO0hajDbPv4Tq4JSlmtORDdDif374QEE/AMZUgmbWUDkhB+fBxR NggPuTQNyjrwn/r0E9jjbcASlIsFueWxbM66sL1wVpSnrT9AS08aQQR00GwnzPRS xXvIdoVS5xU= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DE6CA1CCD; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 14:55:28 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.173.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 81BE7A1CCA; Tue, 22 Dec 2020 14:55:26 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Alex Riesen Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org, Eric Wong Subject: Re: [PATCH] Config option to set the transport protocol version for network fetches References: <20200916200203.GA37225@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20200917132047.GA14771@pflmari> <20200917133153.GA3038002@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20200917133525.GE8079@pflmari> <20200917145142.GA3076467@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20200917151730.GG8079@pflmari> Date: Tue, 22 Dec 2020 11:55:25 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20200917151730.GG8079@pflmari> (Alex Riesen's message of "Thu, 17 Sep 2020 17:17:30 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: A2B1B260-448F-11EB-8EBF-D152C8D8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Alex Riesen writes: > Jeff King, Thu, Sep 17, 2020 16:51:42 +0200: >> No problem, and no rush. I just wanted to make sure those bits didn't >> get overlooked. > > I'll try and do my best :) If I remember correctly, this discussion started as an introduction of useful feature, but got stuck at the implementation phase of how the feature is presented at the UI level after we had general concensus on the design. It has been about 3 months; has anything happened that I missed? It seems that I kept the thread-starter patch in the 'seen' branch, but and haven't updated with a later attempt in the discussion. Thanks.