Michael Haggerty mhag...@alum.mit.edu writes:
If I understand correctly, after this patch the server advertises the
atomic capability even though it doesn't actually have that ability
until a later patch. It seems to me that the order of the patches should
be reversed: don't advertise the
On 12/19/2014 08:38 PM, Stefan Beller wrote:
From: Ronnie Sahlberg sahlb...@google.com
This adds support to the protocol between send-pack and receive-pack to
* allow receive-pack to inform the client that it has atomic push capability
* allow send-pack to request atomic push back.
There
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Stefan Beller sbel...@google.com wrote:
From: Ronnie Sahlberg sahlb...@google.com
This adds support to the protocol between send-pack and receive-pack to
* allow receive-pack to inform the client that it has atomic push capability
* allow send-pack to request
On 22.12.2014 14:52, Eric Sunshine wrote:
On Fri, Dec 19, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Stefan Beller sbel...@google.com wrote:
From: Ronnie Sahlberg sahlb...@google.com
This adds support to the protocol between send-pack and receive-pack to
* allow receive-pack to inform the client that it has atomic
From: Ronnie Sahlberg sahlb...@google.com
This adds support to the protocol between send-pack and receive-pack to
* allow receive-pack to inform the client that it has atomic push capability
* allow send-pack to request atomic push back.
There is currently no setting in send-pack to actually
5 matches
Mail list logo
