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=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, 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 27776208DB for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 17:48:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757575AbdHYRsy (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2017 13:48:54 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:55167 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757572AbdHYRsx (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Aug 2017 13:48:53 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99C2895FF0; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 13:48:52 -0400 (EDT) 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=vfLhcBQGqVow4AOKMkmo/VWUrYE=; b=yBr1ub MY/hiL7O9EQ+HKR44jekOpDzapKFREiBxxCzPIWIguCKEv+ag/b406B08lmGpKCD EknLIP2L3qCxgFrvmGoq6NEJcjhUX1JMQm9sF55Eec4HeAjjl9zW9B5q0LkeNCAO azq6h3mReBWhytY0LHdRHBP/mvAxoS6wsMOZk= 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=Eljwxt+iP67OI5NVhiB4oJrIJQUCKaw2 9HkrYn8OGEkPRvgywaHOvAm58mJioT6qsEr9IXFiyvpR9AgTIphQ6+HYsicPXXry n5qK9G72IuJULvEZtNHBOYi4ft3zWtTfjqssnJF9B8rEGHov0AHpdDUmy0G2ElKi o7+mOErg6lc= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9199295FEF; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 13:48:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D7BB195FEE; Fri, 25 Aug 2017 13:48:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Brandon Williams , git@vger.kernel.org, jrnieder@gmail.com, sbeller@google.com, jonathantanmy@google.com Subject: Re: [RFC 0/7] transitioning to protocol v2 References: <20170824225328.8174-1-bmwill@google.com> <20170825172901.kvquxafudhelxqq3@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:48:50 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20170825172901.kvquxafudhelxqq3@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Fri, 25 Aug 2017 10:29:02 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: A8118BD0-89BD-11E7-B55A-9D2B0D78B957-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > But what if we instead think of it not as "protocol v2" but as "can I > give the server some hints that it may end up ignoring", then we end up > with something more like: > > C: please run upload-pack (btw, I'm only interested in refs/heads/foo) > S: advertisement + caps (hopefully limited to foo, but client is prepared to receive all) > ... etc, as before ... Nice. The caps that come back can tell us between the cases where they only had refs/heads/foo and nothing else, or if they limited their output to it among many others we told them to ignore, so there is no ambiguity. > Or alternatively, I guess make this optional to start with, and > let early adopters turn it on and complain to their server vendors > for a while before flipping the default to on. That sounds like a safe transition plan.