git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [RFC] push: add documentation on push v2

From
BWBrandon Williams <bmwill@google.com>
Date
Jul 24, 2018, 19:28 UTC
Message-ID
<20180724192811.GC225275@google.com>
In-Reply-To
<20180717210915.139521-1-bmwill@google.com>
On 07/17, Brandon Williams wrote:
Show 28 quoted lines
> Signed-off-by: Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com>
> ---
> 
> Since introducing protocol v2 and enabling fetch I've been thinking
> about what its inverse 'push' would look like.  After talking with a
> number of people I have a longish list of things that could be done to
> improve push and I think I've been able to distill the core features we
> want in push v2.  Thankfully (due to the capability system) most of the
> other features/improvements can be added later with ease.
> 
> What I've got now is a rough design for a more flexible push, more
> flexible because it allows for the server to do what it wants with the
> refs that are pushed and has the ability to communicate back what was
> done to the client.  The main motivation for this is to work around
> issues when working with Gerrit and other code-review systems where you
> need to have Change-Ids in the commit messages (now the server can just
> insert them for you and send back new commits) and you need to push to
> magic refs to get around various limitations (now a Gerrit server should
> be able to communicate that pushing to 'master' doesn't update master
> but instead creates a refs/changes/<id> ref).
> 
> Before actually moving to write any code I'm hoping to get some feedback
> on if we think this is an acceptable base design for push (other
> features like atomic-push, signed-push, etc can be added as
> capabilities), so any comments are appreciated.
> 
>  Documentation/technical/protocol-v2.txt | 76 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 76 insertions(+)

Pinging this thread again to hopefully reach some more people for commentary. Looking back through the comments so far there are concerns that a server shouldn't be trusted rewriting my local changes, so to address that we could have the be a config option which is defaulted to not take changes from a server.

Apart from that I didn't see any other major concerns. I'm hoping to get a bit more discussion going before actually beginning work on this.

-- 
Brandon Williams
Previous: Brandon WilliamsNext: Duy Nguyen
Message 16 of 19 in “[RFC] push: add documentation on push v2”
  1. Brandon WilliamsJul 17, 2018
  2. Stefan BellerJul 17, 2018
  3. Derrick StoleeJul 18, 2018
  4. Stefan BellerJul 18, 2018
  5. Brandon WilliamsJul 18, 2018
  6. Jeff HostetlerJul 20, 2018
  7. Brandon WilliamsJul 24, 2018
  8. Brandon WilliamsJul 18, 2018
  9. Duy NguyenJul 18, 2018
  10. Brandon WilliamsJul 18, 2018
  11. Duy NguyenJul 18, 2018
  12. Brandon WilliamsJul 18, 2018
  13. Stefan BellerJul 18, 2018
  14. Duy NguyenJul 18, 2018
  15. Brandon WilliamsJul 18, 2018
  16. Brandon WilliamsJul 24, 2018
  17. Duy NguyenJul 25, 2018
  18. Brandon WilliamsJul 25, 2018
  19. Duy NguyenAug 2, 2018

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.