From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FSL_HELO_FAKE,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_DKIMWL_WL_MED,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C3D91F597 for ; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 18:19:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2388488AbeGXT06 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jul 2018 15:26:58 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-f195.google.com ([209.85.215.195]:42912 "EHLO mail-pg1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2388409AbeGXT06 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jul 2018 15:26:58 -0400 Received: by mail-pg1-f195.google.com with SMTP id y4-v6so3450668pgp.9 for ; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:19:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=bwAtMv73hTm+XIC0S4Eiocb6CN4fA/Fb5JTSAEcDEP4=; b=d77m1QMo3ecxruYxTpE2T1jlEr2B4kuzEf21ioSqrhCUY6WMwNMY2aeJrtsD0kfnZO J8R+QDdLElLxjeFnqbaDMv2jdCwO5d80iRmNXX5kGinO77MPAQ7pE71JaVEtWgfjpHwe fPsw0MFrRGPcBdbwnj1eZUnVzJnHZ9UNErqnCM8gsZjKmEZKoULwy0IjDp1eQLhQR+cM Cxt4ZLDUNMfXcCFgzTQwJ4PYwk7VZDy6Y1J3A6+35ahdMezuXIXxqTbXTsQA4xHAwPH/ my811SvmxxMvmvJ0JPtW0b9gfji32Zdrq2Pmjy55gnQQbb217fEBkSg/upFDrlBFtcgD 5npQ== 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:user-agent; bh=bwAtMv73hTm+XIC0S4Eiocb6CN4fA/Fb5JTSAEcDEP4=; b=kjkn71kUCWcmDS+Xbt0NvSinzEtCKDbmvoEcnh2FD0LJGqpXhq6D3UgzaX42slOW2F dpgKWRI9vZuxzNoim3Ks38UqHmPu9b363I/jIcCIQMhGii03Q0iM/9GkV81DAwTilO8Q XY/FS0z+kWx+n+3NDlXYMIZjD2mRsA5X+JlZ/kRr8PT3sypmKZJNXYR1noD2Ryu1a9/p HEcDjglsKsRM1i0tjIuuoMwh0f8NWrmBasJMHfaopQB8YjdSBHysNTVlHfbgWcPNqT5y wPe2TUh5DJ38pR2a9+tz2rY6p8QpxAolxX2UH3zlML9+1QNcNi4RSiqxn1OKj0cw8qZD jUvw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFQctM5viX9sD+7FH5FxCjezgYhrFdbmT1dd7a4aqRVgyj6jWNV GV8XXQmRlC8y+Plbz/u3mRVAHQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpeZQdp26G483hwqNsiPe7a3O/RcuTeeZxI013LgT8C1Tcaxfkta0rMcGVeZwFHFQA7Nhmr+Fg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:d309:: with SMTP id b9-v6mr17277504pgg.163.1532456355237; Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:19:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2620:0:100e:422:ff43:9291:7eda:b712]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f184-v6sm16755485pfc.88.2018.07.24.11.19.13 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:19:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2018 11:19:13 -0700 From: Brandon Williams To: Jonathan Nieder Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] pack-protocol: mention and point to docs for protocol v2 Message-ID: <20180724181913.GA225275@google.com> References: <20180723174807.28903-1-bmwill@google.com> <20180724045233.GB208393@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180724045233.GB208393@aiede.svl.corp.google.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 07/23, Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Hi, > > Brandon Williams wrote: > > > --- a/Documentation/technical/pack-protocol.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/technical/pack-protocol.txt > > @@ -50,7 +50,8 @@ Each Extra Parameter takes the form of `=` or ``. > > > > Servers that receive any such Extra Parameters MUST ignore all > > unrecognized keys. Currently, the only Extra Parameter recognized is > > -"version=1". > > +"version" with a vlue of '1' or '2'. See protocol-v2.txt for more > > value? yep, missed a letter. > > > +information on protocol version 2. > > Thanks. Some thoughts on other parts of this document that may need > updating: > > - the whole document assumes that 0 and 1 are the only protocol > versions. E.g. the discussion of the version number line in the > response when "version=1" is sent as an Extra Paramter should probably > apply to version 2, too. > > - because the document was written before protocol v2, it describes the > more complicated v1 that many readers shouldn't have to care about > > - there is no one document that describes v2 in a self contained way, > since protocol-v2.txt makes reference to protocol v1. > > - the description of pkt-line format in protocol-common.txt is missing > a discussion of delim-pkt. > > Not about this patch, but I wonder if an organization along the > following lines would make sense? > > 1. Rename pack-protocol.txt to protocol-v1.txt. Rename > protocol-v2.txt to pack-protocol.txt. > > 2. Make pack-protocol.txt self-contained, and remove any redundant > sections from protocol-v1.txt. > > 3. Add a new protocol-v2.txt that briefly describes the benefits and > highlights of protocol v2, referring to pack-protocol.txt for > details. > > That way, newcomers of the future could read pack-protocol.txt and > quickly glean the main protocol in (then) current use. > > What do you think? I dislike the idea of renaming protocol-v2.txt to pack-protocol.txt. I agree that we should probably have protocol-v1 broken out into its own file, taking the parts from pack-protocol.txt, but what really should happen is that pack-protocol.txt could describe the basics of the wire protocol (pkt-lines, the format of the various transports, etc) and then refer to the protocol-v{1,2}.txt documents themselves. -- Brandon Williams