From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Elia Pinto <gitter.spiros@gmail.com>
Cc: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>,
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, tboegi@web.de, sunshine@sunshineco.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 0/3] Implements the GIT_TRACE_CURL environment variable
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 16:45:00 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160420204500.GB14904@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5717DD63.6050002@ramsayjones.plus.com>
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 08:49:55PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote:
> > Strictly speaking 1 should come at the end for the same reason, as
> > setting GIT_TRACE_CURL after seeing that commit would not give users
> > anything new.
>
> Yep, I was just about to send an email saying that the patches should
> be in the exact opposite order! (ie. 1->3 and 3->1) That is *if* you
> want to keep them as a series. I would squash them into one patch ...
I also wondered about simply squashing them. IMHO it does not help to
split documentation from the addition of a feature. It is not as if we
will take one over the other, and by putting them in the same patch you
do not have to justify one without the other.
> > Other than that, I didn't find anything blatantly wrong ;-). Will
> > nitpick individual patches later but I expect that it would be
> > sufficient to locally tweak while queuing without rerolling.
>
> I have one small issue ...
Overall I'm pleased at the concept, though I find the output a little
funny in places.
Most of the "Send/Recv SSL data" chunks are just line noise. Do people
actually care about seeing them? I can conceive of a case where you are
debugging SSL-level stuff, but I feel like you might do better using
openssl s_client to do so, and not git. Should we stick to more
HTTP-level debugging?
For the actual data packets, the first line gets treated differently
than the rest, and you get:
16:33:38.164068 http.c:515 => Send header, 0000000167 bytes (0x000000a7)
0000: GET /git/git/info/refs?service=git-upload-pack HTTP/1.1
16:33:38.164070 http.c:515 0039: Host: github.com
16:33:38.164072 http.c:515 004b: User-Agent: git/2.8.1.220.g9816fc6
...
for instance. Would it be saner to break the "Send header..." bit and
the first data line into separate trace outputs, and end up with
something more like:
16:33:38.164068 http.c:515 => Send header, 0000000167 bytes (0x000000a7)
16:33:38.164069 http.c:515 0000: GET /git/git/info/refs?service=git-upload-pack HTTP/1.1
16:33:38.164070 http.c:515 0039: Host: github.com
16:33:38.164072 http.c:515 004b: User-Agent: git/2.8.1.220.g9816fc6
Or it might even be nice to prefix each line to indicate it is about
sending a header. That would make it much easier to grep for just
particular
It might even be nice to prefix _all_ of the lines with some state
information, like "send header". That's more verbose, but makes it much
easier to pick out snippets with line-oriented tools like grep. I often
find myself doing that kind of thing, either to inspect a subset of the
output, or because I want to be able to pull out things like request
content verbatim so I can replay it.
One of my complaints with GIT_CURL_VERBOSE is that it puts your
credentials into the debugging output. Since it looks like we're
parsing through the data anyway, I wonder if we could auto-censor
Authorization headers by default (and then possibly output them if an
extra variable is given). That would make it safe to ask people to show
the output of GIT_CURL_TRACE on the list without having to explain
further.
-Peff
prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-20 20:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-20 16:28 [PATCHv3 0/3] Implements the GIT_TRACE_CURL environment variable Elia Pinto
2016-04-20 16:28 ` [PATCHv3 1/3] git.txt: document the new " Elia Pinto
2016-04-20 16:28 ` [PATCHv3 2/3] imap-send.c: introduce the GIT_TRACE_CURL enviroment variable Elia Pinto
2016-04-20 16:28 ` [PATCHv3 3/3] http.c: implements the GIT_TRACE_CURL environment variable Elia Pinto
2016-04-20 18:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-04-20 19:56 ` Ramsay Jones
2016-04-20 20:07 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-04-20 18:41 ` [PATCHv3 0/3] Implements " Junio C Hamano
2016-04-20 19:49 ` Ramsay Jones
2016-04-20 20:45 ` Jeff King [this message]
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=20160420204500.GB14904@sigill.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=gitter.spiros@gmail.com \
--cc=ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com \
--cc=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
--cc=tboegi@web.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).