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

Is anyone working on a next-gen Git protocol?

From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Date
Oct 7, 2012, 19:57 UTC
Message-ID
<CACBZZX6b+3P8M+z+X13k9Pq3tvVUfs_k1=foQVreX8K801=efQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 13 quoted lines
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I'm creating a system where a lot of remotes constantly fetch from a
>> central repository for deployment purposes, but I've noticed that even
>> with a remote.$name.fetch configuration to only get certain refs a
>> "git fetch" will still call git-upload pack which will provide a list
>> of all references.
>
> It has been observed that the sender has to advertise megabytes of
> refs because it has to speak first before knowing what the receiver
> wants, even when the receiver is interested in getting updates from
> only one of them, or worse yet, when the receiver is only trying to
> peek the ref it is interested has been updated.

Has anyone started working on a next-gen Git protocol as a result of this discussion? If not I thought I'd give it a shot if/when I have time.

The current protocol is basically (S = Server, C = Client)
 S: Spew out first ref
 S: Advertisement of capabilities
 S: Dump of all our refs
 C/S: Declare wanted refs, negotiate with server
 S: Send pack to client, if needed
And I thought I'd basically turn it into:
 C: Connect to server, declare what protocol we understand
 C: Advertisement of capabilities
 S: Advertisement of capabilities
 C/S: Negotiate what we want
 C/S: Same as v1, without the advertisement of capabilities, and maybe
don't dump refs at all

Basically future-proofing it by having the client say what it supports to begin with along with what it can handle (like in HTTP).

Then in the negotiation phase the client & server would go back & forth about what they want & how they want it. I'd planned to implement something like:

    C: want_refs refs/heads/*
    S: OK to that
    C: want_refs refs/tags/*
    S: OK to that
Or:
    C: want_refs refs/heads/master
    S: OK to that
    C: want_refs refs/tags/v*
    S: OK to that

As a proof of concept (and also something that'll solve the issue I had), but by adding an initial negotiation phase the protocol should be open to any future extensions without making assumptions about the client wanting to know about all of the server's refs, unlike the current protocol.

Next: Ilari Liusvaara
Message 1 of 12 in “Is anyone working on a next-gen Git protocol?”
  1. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonOct 7, 2012
  2. Ilari LiusvaaraOct 7, 2012
  3. Jeff KingOct 7, 2012
  4. Junio C HamanoOct 7, 2012
  5. Junio C HamanoOct 22, 2012
  6. Andreas EricssonOct 8, 2012
  7. Junio C HamanoOct 8, 2012
  8. Steffen ProhaskaOct 10, 2012
  9. Junio C HamanoOct 10, 2012
  10. Philip OakleyOct 10, 2012
  11. Nguyen Thai Ngoc DuyOct 11, 2012
  12. Shawn PearceOct 11, 2012

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.