From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] clone: disconnect transport after fetching Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 03:26:38 -0400 Message-ID: <20090902072638.GC31528@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20090902063647.GA29559@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Barkalow , =?utf-8?B?QmrDtnJu?= Steinbrink , Matthieu Moy , Sitaram Chamarty To: Sverre Rabbelier X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Sep 02 09:26:50 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MikEz-0005VS-Kk for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 09:26:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755766AbZIBH0k (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Sep 2009 03:26:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755356AbZIBH0j (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Sep 2009 03:26:39 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:54872 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751987AbZIBH0j (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Sep 2009 03:26:39 -0400 Received: (qmail 5467 invoked by uid 107); 2 Sep 2009 07:26:53 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Wed, 02 Sep 2009 03:26:53 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 02 Sep 2009 03:26:38 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Sep 02, 2009 at 09:09:19AM +0200, Sverre Rabbelier wrote: > On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 08:36, Jeff King wrote: > > As you can see from the commit message, I did a little extra hunting to > > make sure we are not going to impact any other code paths, and I am > > pretty sure we are fine. > > Thank you for fixing my mistake :). You're welcome, though I am not sure it is your mistake. Arguably this is something we should have been doing all along. The point of abstracting transports was that we didn't need to know their details at the outer layer, but in this case we were relying on the fact that no transports (until empty-clone-over-git) needed an explicit transport_disconnect to cleanly hang up on the other end. So think of it as you exposing a long-standing bug. ;) -Peff