Hi,
Brandon Williams wrote:
> On 06/14, Stefan Beller wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 2:39 PM Brandon Williams <bmw...@google.com> wrote:
>>> + for (r = refs; r; r = r->next) {
>>> + if (!strcmp(end, r->name)) {
>>> + oidcpy(&r->old_oid, &oid);
>>> + break;
>>> + }
>>> + }
>>
>> The server is documented as MUST NOT send additional refs,
>> which is fine here, as we'd have no way of storing them anyway.
>> Do we want to issue a warning, though?
>>
>> if (!r) /* never break'd */
>> warning ("server send unexpected line '%s'", reader.line);
>
> Depends, does this warning help out the end user or do you think it
> would confuse users to see this and still have their fetch succeed?
I think we'd want to error out instead of warning. That keeps the
spec simple and that way, server implementors will notice early if
they are doing something that clients aren't going to understand
anyway, which would benefit users.
Thanks,
Jonathan
