From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, FSL_HELO_FAKE,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FEE0C4320A for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 19:11:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E63E760BD3 for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 19:11:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235656AbhHITLm (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Aug 2021 15:11:42 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53760 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235487AbhHITLm (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Aug 2021 15:11:42 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x62e.google.com (mail-pl1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 864B5C0613D3 for ; Mon, 9 Aug 2021 12:11:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id a20so17646564plm.0 for ; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 12:11:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=E1seFjOdjfXedtOJwIoHb9Hu47D8yX2ZZgGkCwMRnr0=; b=HbYqFU82WmqGWhxmW3rFrUpiCCAsKzOtRwyDoeHnIMzFk4rcbXAMf79+QNGDmzGolF lmwLVvLahUk17rV6Ph21an8j6Q67TxpdZJZVhkNVQg/Xz7shZgi59t9cq54zXNgSOnis oB9bWU8gI8tw8lwjyDHnMbDunJZU9Mf7aeWcPKT93OFmHu7MJOGQqgMW1a97E/0kTsVv UAR+Ytv0zcbrsu9BKNPJcDrT0by5doOCICrJxMV0rYVUxntsK5blJCg3bAwMPT1cA+Uq TKPD/6+00PB47MbpMpfiqPyXcaNRSvU+sb/eYbAX2wfUEx8wdgDjBZiuHau1lZgExO+E aoRA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=E1seFjOdjfXedtOJwIoHb9Hu47D8yX2ZZgGkCwMRnr0=; b=DRM43Cej7Z1y4dvPWCbPc1QFNW7RcMJI5WmLiyVSIjYoZ2AZk1XKzWTk0Thn4ntdaq rCKOwMVvCvy0xIAoUOXR0QS00j5dHkcDOn3sW1vxik3zSCSem6Eyf+7OJCnlH6bZh/Ys G6g79DURJvJTDVj6lgu9nMfLjcAV1h6La+Q4NgOEvVcOvDfTW1RJd5sDrBOVhDdRbMpL SIHSpXSSdvDhMzaru9ayhFi/CRZ9JYB6N47Sq+scSgNFd2uY0mwADm2mQVj9KIFI4BCD SvvDLaS7qbS6Tmy5WAxM4iW4CUbJs3lhW63+nNvU+rX8J+IxKp3IbjsUsGwMxTlTWtA7 Eu6g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531iTuAGv1Ez8WvBXT5lPxxuzBsoNEVL6SczKY8a3VzBSQ1qb3R4 S4i2fFdT1udbtM3d+9Y0hnQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyMSfwNg3X7wG/VbMNkMeBwsc6kGIKW9HxZ1Fz5NQR/F6mWXt5eQ3b2rs4SbvzIR9jjG5uo5w== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:bd81:b029:12c:b6fb:feef with SMTP id q1-20020a170902bd81b029012cb6fbfeefmr22042237pls.84.1628536281089; Mon, 09 Aug 2021 12:11:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2620:15c:2ce:200:4d74:2fd5:acb7:59ca]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n35sm24566908pgb.90.2021.08.09.12.11.20 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 09 Aug 2021 12:11:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2021 12:11:18 -0700 From: Jonathan Nieder To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jonathan Tan , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] transport: no warning if no server wait-for-done Message-ID: References: <20210806214612.1501980-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jonathan Tan writes: >> - if (finish_command(&child)) { >> - /* >> - * The information that push negotiation provides is useful but >> - * not mandatory. >> - */ >> - warning(_("push negotiation failed; proceeding anyway with push")); >> - } > > Perhaps like "optional ancestry negotiation failed---pushing > normally" or some phrasing that assures the users that pushing > without negotiation is perfectly normal? The question is what the user will do with this information. Will they contact the service provider to ask them to turn on push negotiation? Will they turn off push negotiation because they don't want to waste a round trip? Does what they will do depend on _why_ push negotiation failed? If it failed because the server didn't declare the capability and the user has set push.negotate to true to represent "I want to live in the future by using push negotiation wherever it's available", then the message is noise. If it failed due to a bug, then the message is more relevant to the user --- e.g., should we use a different exit status to distinguish between these two cases? Thanks, Jonathan