Re: [PATCHv3 6/9] receive-pack: Prepare for addition of the new 'limit-*' family of capabilities

Sverre Rabbelier [off-list ref] writes:

On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 23:50, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

We should tighten this strstr() to make sure we are not matching in the
middle of a string, and the need to do so is even greater now that you are
going to introduce "foo=<value>" and the value could even be strings in
the future.

If we are writing this down somewhere, should we also dictate how
spaces should be escaped to be "forward-compatible"?

The old clients treat it as SP separted list, e.g. "featurea featureb featureb", 
from the beginning of how capabilities[] code was writte, so I do not see
a point. I would expect an arbitrary string values would be encased in
something like base64, base85 or hex.

Heya,

On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 15:07, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

The old clients treat it as SP separted list, e.g. "featurea featureb featureb",
from the beginning of how capabilities[] code was writte, so I do not see
a point. I would expect an arbitrary string values would be encased in
something like base64, base85 or hex.

Right, that's my point, do we want to leave it up to each individual
option to decide what encoding to use?

-- 
Cheers,

Sverre Rabbelier