Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/3] protocol v2

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Stefan Beller [off-list ref] wrote:

On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

I am _not_ proposing that we should go this route, at least not yet.
I am merely pointing out that an in-place sidegrade from v1 to a
protocol that avoids the megabyte-advertisement-at-the-beginning
seems to be possible, as a food for thought.

This is a fun thing indeed, though I'd personally feel uneasy with
such a probe as
a serious proposal. (Remember somebody 10 years from now wants to enjoy
reading the source code).

That cannot be a serious objection, once you realize that NUL + capability
was exactly the same kind of "yes, we have a hole to allow up customize
the protocol". The code to do so may not be pretty, but the code to implement
ended up being reasonably clean with parse_feature_request() and friends.
After all we live in a real world ;-)