From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] http_init: accept separate URL parameter Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:46:25 -0400 Message-ID: <20111012224625.GA11408@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <4E95FDC8.5030009@drmicha.warpmail.net> <20111012214316.GA4393@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20111012214610.GA4578@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vk4897s4c.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Michael J Gruber , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Oct 13 00:46:34 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RE7ZI-0003ia-Nq for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 13 Oct 2011 00:46:33 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753450Ab1JLWq2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:46:28 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:58984 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753510Ab1JLWq1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:46:27 -0400 Received: (qmail 20142 invoked by uid 107); 12 Oct 2011 22:46:30 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:46:30 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:46:25 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vk4897s4c.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 03:38:27PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 05:43:16PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > ... > >> Instead, let's just add a separate URL parameter to > >> http_init, and all three callsites can pass in the > >> appropriate information. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jeff King > > > > Sorry, I forgot to mention: this is meant to go on top of the > > http-auth-keyring topic. > > Hmm, of course the patch was written to help http-auth-keyring topic, but > wouldn't this be an improvement that is general enough? I.e. it could > even go to the bottom of the topic, no? Yes, it could, and probably should. I suspect it might need some rebasing to do that. I'm going to float some other possible designs for the topic as soon as I put enough polish on them. So I'll try to move this down when I re-roll. In the meantime, if you want to throw it on top, great. If you want to ignore it until then, no problem. :) -Peff