Re: Git-aware HTTP transport
- Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2008 15:55:44 -0400 (EDT)
- From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Git-aware HTTP transport
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
> Yet another draft follows. I believe that I have covered all
> comments with this draft. But I welcome any additional ones,
> as thus far it has been a very constructive process.
>
> The updated protocol looks more like the current native protocol
> does. This should make it easier to reuse code between the two
> protocol implementations.
[...]
> pkt-line Format
> ---------------
>
> Much of the payload is described around pkt-lines.
>
> A pkt-line is a variable length binary string. The first four bytes
> of the line indicates the total length of the line, in hexadecimal.
> The total length includes the 4 bytes used to denote the length. A
> line is usually terminated by an LF, which must be included in the
> total length if present.
>
> Binary data is permitted within a pkt-line so implementors should
> ensure their pkt-line parsing/formatting routines are 8-bit clean.
> The maximum length of a pkt-line's data is 65532 bytes (65536 - 4).
Shouldn't that be 65531, since you cannot represent 65536 with 4 hex
digits?
> C: 001bcapability include-tag
> C: 0019capability thin-pack
> ....
[...]
> The "capability" command requests a single protocol feature
> to be enabled by the server. Typically these are used to
> describe aspects of the pack that will be returned. See
> below for more details on the current capabilities.
Why not having all capabilities listed at once on a single line instead?
That's more or less what the current protocol does already.
Nicolas
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html