From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tay Ray Chuan Subject: Re: Issue 323 in msysgit: Can't clone over http Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2009 21:10:21 +0800 Message-ID: References: <7viqfzvwf1.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <0016e6470f36315b8a0472bc75a8@google.com> <20090904212956.f02b0c60.rctay89@gmail.com> <7v8wgrbb9e.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vocpn44dg.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090907172751.6cf38640.rctay89@gmail.com> <7v7hwatw0v.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, msysgit@googlegroups.com, Tom Preston-Werner To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Sep 08 15:10:38 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 1Ml0Sz-0001Y3-BT for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:10:37 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753513AbZIHNK0 convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2009 09:10:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753479AbZIHNK0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2009 09:10:26 -0400 Received: from mail-iw0-f175.google.com ([209.85.223.175]:53327 "EHLO mail-iw0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753454AbZIHNKZ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Sep 2009 09:10:25 -0400 Received: by iwn5 with SMTP id 5so1124954iwn.4 for ; Tue, 08 Sep 2009 06:10:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=jczib0CemwuOfJPjqYidK/8q4hU6JI9eZxNwVtoVzic=; b=xMzvEAzgnBXphCSLAm+xJ43aBPEfG4M6fL2AlBM8ypp+6Ar/SaU6/7Ek/KEYMqJrTT GzfLSmuyjityMrUm7DbWFcxEF0N3Bw/HWO8uCA52++LYAjK3EquxaxoHTbzpICVrYnsZ qra2Ni6EihcjYONLZIeja1L2f9eJp+crC5iTQ= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=qrYMldnEC6BtkDQyogcRH5CtCpORtzUDgGuh7MMjx9V1z4eHTHw0KXRizTvGXMkPgW 9+DabceEP0WFmg3jqgouTJhSFUP5pGX3qBwimSc29zr8TFMaWsQn+Jg61wc+ysczAWUF N6BAL/I2wAvmZjULZZ49PhhBwQjy6W1LfjK0k= Received: by 10.231.126.8 with SMTP id a8mr13248021ibs.15.1252415425881; Tue, 08 Sep 2009 06:10:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7v7hwatw0v.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 3:06 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote= : > I am torn about this. > > On one hand, if we are going to treat such a half failure as nothing > conclusive, I do not see a point to keep that check to begin with. > > On the other hand, if a HEAD request to a URL results in an unauthori= zed, > what plausible excuse the server operator could give for allowing a G= ET > request to the same URL? =A0If we are going to keep the check if *.pa= ck that > corresponds to the *.idx will be available, shouldn't we trust whatev= er > check we perform? I am in favour or removing this check, not just due to its unreliability, but for the sake of consistency (we very rarely send a HEAD request to poll data before doing a GET). Do disregard the patch included earlier, if you haven't already done so= =2E --=20 Cheers, Ray Chuan