From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2013 20:07:45 GMT Subject: Re: Is anyone working on a next-gen Git protocol (Re: [PATCH v3 0/8] Hiding refs) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7vfw1avjcw.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason writes: > >> Do you have any plans for something that *does* have the reduction of >> network bandwidth as a primary goal? > > Uncluttering gives reduction of bandwidth anyway, so I do not see > much point in the distinction you seem to be making. Doing this work wouldn't only give us a way to specify which refs we want, but if done correctly would future-proof the protocol in case we want to add any other extensions down the line in a backwards-compatible fashion without having the server first spew all his refs at us. Anyway, an implementation that allows a client to say "I want X" is simpler than an implementation where a server has to anticipate in advance which X the clients will ask for. >> Is this what you've been working on? Because if so I misunderstood you >> thinking you were going to work on something that gave clients the >> ability specify what they wanted before the initial ref advertisement. >> ... >> 4. http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/207190 > > "Who speaks first" mentioned in 4. above, was primarily about > "delaying ref advertisement", which would be a larger protocol > change. Nobody seems to have attacked it since it was discussed, > and I was tired of hearing nothing but complaints and whines. This > "hiding refs" series was done as a cheaper way to solve a related > issue, without having to wait for the solution of "delaying > advertisement", which is an orthogonal issue. Oh sure. I just wanted to know if you were working on delaying ref advertisement to avoid duplicating efforts. I had the impression you were given your earlier E-Mail, but obviously we had a misunderstanding.