Re: [RFC 0/7] transitioning to protocol v2

2 messages, 2 authors, 2017-08-25 · open the first message on its own page

Re: [RFC 0/7] transitioning to protocol v2

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2017-08-25 17:14:20

Stefan Beller [off-list ref] writes:
For now I would suggest we put a protocol v2 in place that is
the current protocol + a version number coming through the
poked hole at the beginning; the goal and review of this series
ought to focus on getting the version handshake right...
Oh, we are in absolute agreement on that.  It would be nice if we
can have new tests to demonostrate three combinations working well
(i.e. use 'installed git' whose path is given externally on one end
of the connection, while the just-built binary sits on the other
end, in addition to making sure just-built binary successfully talks
with itself).

Re: [RFC 0/7] transitioning to protocol v2

From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2017-08-25 17:36:37

On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 10:14:13AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Stefan Beller [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
For now I would suggest we put a protocol v2 in place that is
the current protocol + a version number coming through the
poked hole at the beginning; the goal and review of this series
ought to focus on getting the version handshake right...
Oh, we are in absolute agreement on that.  It would be nice if we
can have new tests to demonostrate three combinations working well
(i.e. use 'installed git' whose path is given externally on one end
of the connection, while the just-built binary sits on the other
end, in addition to making sure just-built binary successfully talks
with itself).
The harness in t/interop can perhaps help with that (at least between
existing git versions; testing across other implementations makes the
setup a lot tricker).

-Peff
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help