Re: [PATCH 2/2] pack documentation review updates

Hey,

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Nanako Shiraishi [off-list ref] wrote:

Update Scott's protocol document according to review comments given by Junio.

 * name of "%00" byte is NUL not null;
 * requestee sends current values of its refs, not "known values";
 * consistently use "obj-id";
 * requestor chooses the capabilities it wants to be in effect;
 * pack data is sent after negotiation finishes, not just after "some of
  it is done";
 * what it has is called "its", not "it's";
 * consistently use "flush-pkt";
 * remove redundant "something like";
 * status report for send-pack is sent from the receiver, not from client;
 * don't unnecessarily say "SHOULD NOT" when existing servers can satisify
  "MUST NOT";
 * only one thin pack is sent and thickened;
 * an all-zero value is defined as a zero-id, so use it.

Signed-off-by: しらいし ななこ <redacted>
---

I was _just_ working on this yesterday and had gotten about halfway
through - I'm traveling a lot right now, so I'm a bit behind.  This
looks good, thanks for taking the time Nanako.

Signed-off-by: Scott Chacon <redacted>

Scott Chacon [off-list ref] writes:

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:19 AM, Nanako Shiraishi [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Update Scott's protocol document according to review comments given by Junio.

 * name of "%00" byte is NUL not null;
...
 * don't unnecessarily say "SHOULD NOT" when existing servers can satisify
  "MUST NOT";
...

I was _just_ working on this yesterday and had gotten about halfway
through - I'm traveling a lot right now, so I'm a bit behind.  This
looks good, thanks for taking the time Nanako.

Signed-off-by: Scott Chacon <redacted>

Thanks, both.

I had some doubts about the "SHOULD NOT"/"MUST" on obj-id myself, but if
you are Ok with the change, I wouldn't complain ;-).

Will squash this in.