Re: [PATCH 2/2] refs: add GIT_REF_URI to specify reference backend and directory
- From
Toon Claes <toon@iotcl.com>
- Date
- Nov 26, 2025, 13:11 UTC
- Message-ID
- <87see1vszo.fsf@iotcl.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAOLa=ZTn5UEqifJrJcVfCt=YyVOa3CMdLRsLpG=g4x2vmDPeKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com> writes:
Show 15 quoted lines
> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes: > >> Toon Claes <toon@iotcl.com> writes: >> >>>> <ref_backend>://<path> >>> >>> I like this idea. This would allow us in the future to also do something >>> like: >>> >>> reftable+nfs://10.11.12.13/ref-dir >> >> I actually thought from Karthik's definition that what you are >> trying to say is spelled more like this: >> >> reftable://nfs://10.11.12.13/ref-dir
LOL, I didn't realize since 07c7782cc8 (Disown ssh+git and git+ssh, 2016-02-15) 'ssh+git' isn't actually mentioned no more.
Show 12 quoted lines
>> IOW, the underlying URI to "reach the resource" is in the <path> >> part (i.e., "nfs://<addr>/<directory>"). And I found it somewhat a >> strange syntax, because the "to reach the resource, visit this" URI >> may not necessarily look like <path>, and I also wondered if >> spelling it like <ref_backend>:<URI-for-resource> is more >> appropriate. > > This is a much better way to state what I was going for, I was > considering the entire <ref_backend>:<path> as the URI since currently > we only deal with FS paths (for files and reftable). But that could > potentially change. As such, it makes sense to state it as > <ref_backend>:<URI-for-resource>. Will modify accordingly.
I don't really care on the format, as long as we're consistent. I know Patrick is working on pluggable object databases and also there he's suggesting to do `<backend_type>://<URI>` which might also lead to double `://` use. But I guess that's still subjected to change.
That said. Should we change the current proposal of `<ref_backend>://<path>` to `<ref_backend>:file://<path>`? Or can we simply assume the latter implied from the former?
-- Cheers, Toon