From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Shawn O. Pearce" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Update packfile transfer protocol documentation Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 16:58:15 -0800 Message-ID: <20091103005815.GW10505@spearce.org> References: <7vzl74trmc.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20091102235707.GV10505@spearce.org> <7vtyxctpf8.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Scott Chacon , git list To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Nov 03 01:59:02 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 1N57jf-00040c-Bc for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 03 Nov 2009 01:58:59 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757548AbZKCA6P (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:58:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757451AbZKCA6M (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:58:12 -0500 Received: from george.spearce.org ([209.20.77.23]:55144 "EHLO george.spearce.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757516AbZKCA6K (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Nov 2009 19:58:10 -0500 Received: by george.spearce.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 28019381FE; Tue, 3 Nov 2009 00:58:15 +0000 (UTC) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vtyxctpf8.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Shawn O. Pearce" writes: > > Junio C Hamano wrote: > > ... > >> Shouldn't we say "the client MUST NOT make reference update request if > >> everything is up to date" which would imply that in practice there is no > >> reason to send an empty pack data? Creating new branch quirk aside, I do agree with this. Clients shouldn't send no-op updates if it knows in advance the update is a no-op. -- Shawn.