Re: [PATCH 2/2] remote-curl.c: handle v1 when check_smart_http

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 24, 2021, 20:33 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqq35wkxper.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq7dlwxpn3.fsf@gitster.g>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 10 quoted lines

>> +	} else if (!strcmp(reader.line, "version 1")) {
>> +		die(_("v1 is just the original protocol with a version string, use v0 or v2 instead."));
>
> The user may no longer get "invalid response; got 'version 1'", but
> the above does not still explain why v1 is bad and v0 or v2 is
> welcome, either.  IOW, I do not think the patch improves the message
> to achieve what it attempted to do, i.e.
>
>     ... but the other side just treat it as "invalid response", this
>     can't explain why is not ok.

Alternatively

	v1 is not supported; use v0 or v2

would explain why the connection is refused. It explains why it is not ok much clearly than "just the original with a version string".

Show 6 quoted lines

> I wonder if it is a sensible and better alternative to treat v1
> response as if we got v0 (if v1 is truly the same as v0 except for
> the initial version advertisement).
>
> Input from those who are familiar with the protocol versions is very
> much appreciated.

This still stands; we reject because we don't support, but is it easy to support it instead, if there is no difference?