Re: [PATCH 00/20] [GIT PULL][v3.2] tracing: queued updates

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Oct 12, 2011, 14:19 UTC
Message-ID: <20111012141939.GA25085@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20111012080711.GM18618@elte.hu>

On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 10:07:14AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> > On Tue, 11 Oct 2011 07:50:17 +0200, Ingo Molnar said:
> > 
> > >  $ git pull git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/rostedt/linux-2.6-trace.git tip/perf/core
> > >  fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly
> > 
> > Is it possible to get 'git' to say something more informative than 
> > "hung up unexpectedly"? "Tree not found, check URL" or similar 
> > would be nice...

It's not possible for the client to say anything more. The server sees that the request isn't valid and hangs up without saying anything. So the server needs to be changed to output better responses.

Show 14 quoted lines

> Firstly, arguably, typoing something is not 'fatal' really - it's 
> just a resource that was not found on the server.
> 
> Secondly, and more importantly, the reason for the failed pull is 
> indeed important to know, if you want to resolve the problem with a 
> minimum fuss:
> 
>  - Was it the tree that didnt exist?
>  - Or the branch?
>  - Or was there some other problem [such as a truly unexpectedly 
>                                     closed transport socket]?
> 
> It's really useful for a painless UI flow to disambiguate failure 
> messages into clearly actionable variants.

I agree. I think some people are concerned with leaking information about which repos exist and how they are configured. That is probably not a big problem for a public site like kernel.org, though.

You might find this thread interesting:

  http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/182529/focus=182642

It seems to have resulted in a patch that will at least say "access denied" for every error. Which is a step up from "the remote end hung up unexpectedly", but I do think most users would appreciate it being more specific.

Perhaps we just need a config option to turn on more verbose messages, if the site decides that there's no security implications to doing so.

-Peff