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 6217E1F66F for ; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 21:16:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2389170AbgKCVQo (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2020 16:16:44 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:56913 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388792AbgKCVK4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Nov 2020 16:10:56 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06DA09B36C; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 16:10:55 -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=1aZFbqJp34l3eeMDsCbvrvjm/lg=; b=Y9YHa5 Oey0HMoheKh5/cluEQ5gWcGkFLNQK8WKGW2pV23QesLndakAdKiEM0qv3nJv5dBK 9w2d6tOWM59lCUYWZ/ezChOvr0nyIhOnzn9uf++RodvskrIhh1eNp4iVNDPCNae6 d9urKMgjvUOINRyrmu5N4o949kIRGJpEbF44E= 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=PFWY0mqhbggCPqpcevQbewuhjHHPAgTc xkvAz8zm4MK1Zvkh9NtG+3W9ynfuJ2s3WyrYP6b+HHwm15FEm8ADpx35XHteZ84T CLK8I2aa/kOjMVmOrwH6dCQ7TZyQ35bjCoD23EOWftw9USjlZBdn0oPOxHzAxOyR k2P4si4lnXU= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F18D89B36B; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 16:10:54 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 63EDC9B36A; Tue, 3 Nov 2020 16:10:54 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Daniel Duvall , Jeff King Cc: Git Users Subject: Re: [PATCH] upload-pack: allow stateless client EOF just prior to haves References: <1604022059-18527-1-git-send-email-dan@mutual.io> <20201030044012.GA3259692@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20201030090902.GA3268509@coredump.intra.peff.net> Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 13:10:53 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20201030090902.GA3268509@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 30 Oct 2020 05:09:02 -0400") 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: 0F4750F8-1E19-11EB-ACA1-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > I'm still uncertain whether it could all be done in one request for v0. > But one possible solution is: let's not care. If v2 does it correctly, > that's the future anyway (or present; it's now the default in v2.29). > And the change you're proposing in upload-pack would be desirable anyway > to help deal with older clients. > > If that's the route we go, we should make sure the commit message > explains it. Yeah, I'd agree that punting on v0 and making sure the current version would work well is good enough. I lost track and am not sure what's the current status of the topic is. Is v3 [*1*] the latest and satisfactory one? Thanks. [Reference] *1* https://lore.kernel.org/git/20201031023901.48193-1-dan@mutual.io/