All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org>
To: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Cc: Scott Chacon <schacon@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>, Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>,
	Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Comments pack protocol description in "Git Community Book" (second round)
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 13:13:24 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090607201324.GB16497@spearce.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200906071021.08922.jnareb@gmail.com>

Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
> In description of sideband:
> 
> >  When a sideband is used, 2 means "progress messages, most likely
> >  suitable for stderr". 1 means "pack data". 3 means "fatal error
> >  message, and we're dead now".  No other channels are used or valid.
> 
> it is true that no other channels are used, but it is not true that 
> other channels are invalid. If they are not supported by client, there 
> are simply dropped. This opens possibility of future extension. I guess 
> that channel 0 is invalid, because it would be understood as _input_ 
> channel (for sending data from client to server), though.
> 
> Please correct me if I am wrong here...

An implementation reading a muxed stream SHOULD fail fast if it
encounters a channel number it doesn't understand.

JGit already fails fast with an error if it gets anything not in 1-3.
C Git already fails fast with an error as well.

An implementation writing a muxed stream shouldn't produce a channel
number unless it knows the reader can support it.

To add a new channel number to the supported set, a new capability
should be introduced to the protocol, and enabled if both sides
have agreed to support it.

Currently, stream 0 and stream 4-255 are undefined.  That is,
any new capability could claim that stream and start to use it,
if it needed to.

I think the primary Git contributors would prefer to see new channels
in the 4-255 range, as then 0 can continue to stay invalid... aka
"not true" in C.  Like in the pack type codes, we might want to save
0 for the day when all 1-255 are filled and we need to expand the
channel number range into 2 bytes.  But even then, we could just
do a new side-band-64kv2 capability or something.  :-)
 
-- 
Shawn.

  reply	other threads:[~2009-06-07 20:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-05-12 21:29 Request for detailed documentation of git pack protocol Jakub Narebski
2009-05-12 23:34 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-05-14  8:24   ` Jakub Narebski
2009-05-14 14:57     ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-05-14 15:02       ` Andreas Ericsson
2009-05-15 20:29         ` Linus Torvalds
2009-05-15 16:51       ` Clemens Buchacher
2009-05-14 18:13     ` Nicolas Pitre
2009-05-14 20:27       ` Jakub Narebski
2009-05-14 13:55   ` Scott Chacon
2009-05-14 14:44     ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-05-14 15:01     ` Jakub Narebski
2009-05-15  0:58       ` A Large Angry SCM
2009-05-15 19:05         ` Ealdwulf Wuffinga
2009-06-02 21:39     ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-02 23:27       ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-03  0:50         ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-03  1:29           ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-03  2:11             ` Junio C Hamano
2009-06-03  2:15               ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-03  9:21             ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-03 14:48               ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-03 15:07                 ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-03 15:39                   ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-03 15:50                     ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-03 16:51                 ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-03 16:56                   ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-03 20:19                     ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-03 20:24                       ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-03 22:04                         ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-03 22:04                           ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-03 22:16                           ` Junio C Hamano
2009-06-03 22:46                             ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-04  7:17                         ` Andreas Ericsson
2009-06-04  7:26                           ` Junio C Hamano
2009-06-06 16:33                     ` Scott Chacon
2009-06-06 17:24                       ` Junio C Hamano
2009-06-06 17:41                       ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-03 21:38                   ` Tony Finch
2009-06-03 17:11                 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-06-03 19:05                 ` Johannes Sixt
2009-06-03  2:18           ` Robin H. Johnson
2009-06-03 10:47             ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-03 14:17               ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-03 20:56           ` Tony Finch
2009-06-03 21:20             ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-03 21:53               ` Tony Finch
2009-06-04  8:45                 ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-04 11:41                   ` Tony Finch
2009-06-04 18:41                   ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-03 12:29       ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-03 14:19         ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-04 20:55       ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-04 21:57         ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-05  0:45         ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-05  7:24           ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-05  8:45             ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-06 21:38       ` Comments pack protocol description in "Git Community Book" (second round) Jakub Narebski
2009-06-06 21:58         ` Scott Chacon
2009-06-07  8:21           ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-07 20:13             ` Shawn O. Pearce [this message]
2009-06-07 20:43           ` Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-13  9:30           ` Comments pack protocol description in "RFC for the Git Packfile Protocol" (long) Jakub Narebski
2009-06-07 20:06         ` Comments pack protocol description in "Git Community Book" (second round) Shawn O. Pearce
2009-06-09  9:39           ` Jakub Narebski
2009-06-09 14:28             ` Shawn O. Pearce

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20090607201324.GB16497@spearce.org \
    --to=spearce@spearce.org \
    --cc=ae@op5.se \
    --cc=dot@dotat.at \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=j6t@kdbg.org \
    --cc=jnareb@gmail.com \
    --cc=schacon@gmail.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.