On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 03:24:14PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > But if we had a real full-duplex connection over https, I think there
> > would be no reason for git:// to continue existing (we'd probably keep
> > ssh as it's a useful protocol for authentication, though).
>
> Agreed.
>
> Using
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 05:15:51PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 02:11:41PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
>
> > > For HTTPS, I'd just as soon use HTTP-level features.
> >
> > ALPN, used carefully, could potentially allow eliminating one round-trip
> > compared to HTTPS, and coul
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 02:11:41PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > For HTTPS, I'd just as soon use HTTP-level features.
>
> ALPN, used carefully, could potentially allow eliminating one round-trip
> compared to HTTPS, and could also allow full-duplex communication.
I'd love to have a real full-d
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 04:54:27PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 01:31:50PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
>
> > > You can dig up the discussion on the list under the name "protocol v2",
> > > but basically yes, that approach has been considered. It's a little
> > > gross just bec
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 01:31:50PM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > You can dig up the discussion on the list under the name "protocol v2",
> > but basically yes, that approach has been considered. It's a little
> > gross just because it leaves other protocols behind http (and it is not
> > necessa
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:50:11AM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:34:44AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> >
> >> > Sadly you cannot use a capability to fix that, because all of this
> >> > happens before the client agre
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 02:28:52PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:34:44AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
>
> > > Sadly you cannot use a capability to fix that, because all of this
> > > happens before the client agrees to any capabilities (you can find
> > > discussion of a "v2"
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:34:44AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > Sadly you cannot use a capability to fix that, because all of this
> > happens before the client agrees to any capabilities (you can find
> > discussion of a "v2" protocol on the list which solves this, but it's
> > sort of languis
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:34:44AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
>
>> > Sadly you cannot use a capability to fix that, because all of this
>> > happens before the client agrees to any capabilities (you can find
>> > discussion of a "v2" protocol o
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 12:31:45PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 09:18:39AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
>
> > Commit 5e7dcad771cb873e278a0571b46910d7c32e2f6c in September 2013 added
> > support to upload-pack to show the symbolic target of non-HEAD symbolic
> > refs. However,
On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 09:18:39AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> Commit 5e7dcad771cb873e278a0571b46910d7c32e2f6c in September 2013 added
> support to upload-pack to show the symbolic target of non-HEAD symbolic
> refs. However, commit d007dbf7d6d647dbcf0f357545f43f36dec46f3b in
> November 2013 re
Commit 5e7dcad771cb873e278a0571b46910d7c32e2f6c in September 2013 added
support to upload-pack to show the symbolic target of non-HEAD symbolic
refs. However, commit d007dbf7d6d647dbcf0f357545f43f36dec46f3b in
November 2013 reverted that, because it used a capability to transmit
the information, a
12 matches
Mail list logo
