Re: [PATCH 00/26] protocol version 2
- From
- Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com>
- Date
- Jan 11, 2018, 00:23 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20180111002355.GA91567@google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20180109095534.c0c9b9ad3933d406c993c3ab@google.com>
On 01/09, Jonathan Tan wrote:
Show 23 quoted lines
> On Tue, 2 Jan 2018 16:18:02 -0800 > Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com> wrote: > > > * Introduce a new remote-helper command 'connect-half-duplex' which is > > implemented by remote-curl (the http remote-helper). This allows for a > > client to establish a half-duplex connection and use remote-curl as a proxy > > to wrap requests in http before sending them to the remote end and > > unwrapping the responses and sending them back to the client's stdin. > > I'm not sure about the "half-duplex" name - it is half-duplex in that > each side must terminate their communications with a flush, but not > half-duplex in that request-response pairs can overlap each other (e.g. > during negotation during fetch - there is an optimization in which the > client tries to keep two requests pending at a time). I think that the > idea we want to communicate is that requests and responses are always > packetized, stateless, and always happen as a pair. > > I wonder if "stateless-connect" is a better keyword - it makes sense to > me (once described) that "stateless" implies that the client sends > everything the server needs at once (thus, in a packet), the server > sends everything the client needs back at once (thus, in a packet), and > then the client must not assume any state-storing on the part of the > server or transport.
I like that name much better, I think I'll change it to use 'stateless-connect'. Thanks :)
-- Brandon Williams