Re: [RFC PATCH 4/8] Support remote helpers implementing smart transports

From

ILIlari Liusvaara <ilari.liusvaara@elisanet.fi>

Date

Dec 2, 2009, 05:55 UTC

Message-ID

<20091202055543.GC31244@Knoppix>

In-Reply-To

<20091201192233.GL21299@spearce.org>

On Tue, Dec 01, 2009 at 11:22:33AM -0800, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:

> 
> This flies against every other convention we have.  git:// uses the
> string 'git-upload-pack' and 'git-receive-pack', and so does the
> smart-http code.  We should continue to use the git- prefix here,
> to be consistent, even though by context its clearly implied.

Changed for next round (put the git- -prefixes into names).
 

> Why 'OK'?  Currently remote-helpers return an empty blank line
> to any successful command, not 'OK'.

Changed to "" (i.e. blank line) for next round.
 

> FALLBACK almost makes sense, but ERROR we don't do in the
> the existing helper protocol.  Instead the helper simply
> prints its error message(s) to stderr and does exit(128).
> aka what die() does.

ERROR case changed to exit(128) of helper for next round.

> Why both connect-r and invoke-r?  Why isn't connect-r sufficient
> here?  Isn't it sufficient for any service that runs over git:// ?

-Ilari