Thus said Richard Hipp on Tue, 07 Aug 2018 11:02:03 -0400:
> That would delay the second HTTP request coming over the SSH connection.
When I suggested that, I didn't understand enough about the backoffice
design---specifically that it was a long-running task. After reading the
forum page you
Thus said Richard Hipp on Tue, 07 Aug 2018 10:21:34 -0400:
> yes, we do want backoffice to run for SSH transport.
Then I suggest that we simply make backoffice_run() smart enough to know
that it has already run once:
For example, perhaps instead of a panic here, backoffice_run() should
just
On 07.08.18 16:16 , Andy Bradford wrote:
> Thus said joerg van den hoff on Tue, 07 Aug 2018 16:10:15 +0200:
>
>> why did I see the problem only when actually cloning from another
>> machine, whereas a clone using ssh while being loggedin to the server
>> machine still worked? in both
On 8/7/18, Andy Bradford wrote:
> Does it make sense to have backoffice_run() in the SSH transport? If
> not, then your fix is apropos.
yes, we do want backoffice to run for SSH transport. My "fix" is
really a work-around, not a true fix. We need to devise a proper fix
for this, but I
Thus said joerg van den hoff on Tue, 07 Aug 2018 16:10:15 +0200:
> why did I see the problem only when actually cloning from another
> machine, whereas a clone using ssh while being loggedin to the server
> machine still worked? in both cases the ssh communication should be
> the same,
On 07.08.18 15:53 , Richard Hipp wrote:
Please build the from the tip of the forum-v2 branch and let me know
whether or not it is working for you.
if the server machine is running that version, yes it does indeed. thanks a lot for looking into
this issue ...
I see from the checkin message
Thus said Richard Hipp on Tue, 07 Aug 2018 09:53:35 -0400:
> Please build the from the tip of the forum-v2 branch and let me know
> whether or not it is working for you.
I was just about to submit a similar fix but you beat me to it.
The reason why this doesn't work the same as a
Please build the from the tip of the forum-v2 branch and let me know
whether or not it is working for you.
On 8/7/18, joerg van den hoff wrote:
>
>
> On 07.08.18 00:36, Richard Hipp wrote:
> > On 8/6/18, joerg van den hoff wrote:
> >> question: the observation that it seemingly is related
On 07.08.18 00:36, Richard Hipp wrote:
> On 8/6/18, joerg van den hoff wrote:
>> question: the observation that it seemingly is related specifically to
>> repos holding uv files is unimportant/irrelevant? or does that have
>> implications where to look?
>
> This is not much help in debugging.
On 8/6/18, joerg van den hoff wrote:
> this is a pure
> CLI/ssh scenario.
The ssh transport works by invoking the same HTTP processing engine as
is used on a website, just on the far end of an ssh tunnel. It's all
the same under the covers.
That said, I do remember making some minor changes to
On 06.08.18 22:19, Richard Hipp wrote:
> Here is the technical problem I am having difficulty with. My
> currently solution is (probably) what is causing the delays and errors
> you are seeing. Suggestions from you are any mailing list reader on
> how to solve this problem are appreciated.
I've
11 matches
Mail list logo
