From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Allow transfer of any valid sha1 Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 13:53:51 -0700 Message-ID: <7vy7wpsu5c.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7vejyjpz9a.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vwtcay5k8.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v3beyuffg.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 25 22:54:12 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FjMqB-0001cO-Pf for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 25 May 2006 22:53:57 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030412AbWEYUxx (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 May 2006 16:53:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030413AbWEYUxx (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 May 2006 16:53:53 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao06.cox.net ([68.230.241.33]:11228 "EHLO fed1rmmtao06.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030412AbWEYUxw (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 May 2006 16:53:52 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao06.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060525205351.TEKJ15069.fed1rmmtao06.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Thu, 25 May 2006 16:53:51 -0400 To: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) In-Reply-To: (Eric W. Biederman's message of "Thu, 25 May 2006 14:30:58 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) writes: > So fixing fetch-pack is easy and pretty non-controversial. > The patch below handles that. I am at work so I cannot really spend time on this right now, but I am OK with letting it send arbitrary SHA1 the caller obtained out of band. I do not know about your implementation, since I haven't really looked at it. > (The movement of filter_refs may actually be overkill) It may not just overkill but may actively be wrong, but again I haven't looked at it yet. Will take a look tonight.