From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-b5-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-b5-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89AF61FC8 for ; Sat, 1 Nov 2025 23:17:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.148 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762039053; cv=none; b=cQKc95vix4syU4dTGzcqdxlIiypFVS6Z3MT3NQwp1UPWWxSHcMCkz5JZPcbUe3HzTncZslL3kof+9ts3L+7zitHYyT2f8P21wAYS5Pcv9X45lTWrG7ovoekpep2HYi/HE4Nf2gBx/vrNFANFRLWteTIs/QBxCXXjgu2dwCo+imE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762039053; c=relaxed/simple; bh=P36gzth8JcBoxQnG473G5BiZoTgx2nWQ4U2jm/vKWaU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=LOoDPrICCzdAH/GyRtri1pCyACCy2hyTHSFW+5jInzlds8frr0Yw0t2+GEeakIrkUP2YsAQlSk5urSInFxSdrQnBHzQIO+oX4H7eMiUJaH7mVOa8rpLrq6PnQaof7hgtQRdpZPGxbuj5jVcJT0/DYjk9UZoSPRyaXk0cEEDM/sg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=f6Y1SoE7; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=CNbfALtc; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.148 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="f6Y1SoE7"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="CNbfALtc" Received: from phl-compute-01.internal (phl-compute-01.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailfout.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9793B1D001B7; Sat, 1 Nov 2025 19:17:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-01.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 01 Nov 2025 19:17:29 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1762039049; x=1762125449; bh=SkfzT0BEJS 0wM1FRfEIVdHrU6m1svVTQxuMZJTxMF18=; b=f6Y1SoE7GYee4tcUtjOYRVh5RS 74w8Wk2J3PPIGcwV+75uVCXSUdcvVPmtatGNBH8eg01gMapANVoNVK88RichfZMT 3PAvYF3ztUNnabHngy4gasOPokT7nktBF2KdbaOrxEf+QJKX9CYPhGSS7vrpNI4n hTZz1Ossc6VS/e5DyMP8n4q5mnfwxrxVE3BFib+nN2FevRuCzd6s8Zdyy4NM5liP zP4Ue9TfMBihb6gG38NzhSzv+qi2zOWR07guhwTZl0jXmQU2omIJr8mDix2h84eW 68yAGSULTMbQ/H6m9p2ZZbh/fszwjGpE9jiZOnw7sJNhhSAQeKXZe9sgAGmg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1762039049; x=1762125449; bh=SkfzT0BEJS0wM1FRfEIVdHrU6m1svVTQxuM ZJTxMF18=; b=CNbfALtc2A/1lNJi+8ArbUbzUWftmXX9T6ExH+bXof2nI+JT/B/ DNqKAcPeww4vjgxxzWKdNIndMbXaTtFKtdY7adx+6ddCrZSX2I1izyipf+LR5F0t 5lXAGg+Xqrvmk9xdIaJOEhDXwLJ566EDhYZ/pSJP6j/+CzLbe51yvjUWtSiD6Wuy OS/P3nwEWhvvvzk4fqQXzhUlrjEhx8v2nP6zb9uupADIIutUJ2uw8pgYJWsuhMgw /0eM0kluhSGlwNFEwcXk8qpofgp22OKIrxJr7xmK02stPH5i2eKSxjL7zU3ERr3Z +UOj80nA21QtzW5REuNxwe3TiOv8cwFrAIw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdeggddujeefieejucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceu rghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefhvfevufgjfhffkfgfgggtsehttdertd dtredtnecuhfhrohhmpefluhhnihhoucevucfjrghmrghnohcuoehgihhtshhtvghrsehp ohgsohigrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeefveetteejheeugeffledvteeive ffueefjeelueffteeigffgfedthfefieegieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecu rfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhnsg gprhgtphhtthhopeefpdhmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehqjhgvshhs rgeiiedvsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnh gvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sat, 1 Nov 2025 19:17:28 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: QueenJcloud Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] gitprotocol-http: document invalid 'want' error handling In-Reply-To: <20251101161513.1794-1-qjessa662@gmail.com> (QueenJcloud's message of "Sat, 1 Nov 2025 17:15:12 +0100") References: <20251101161513.1794-1-qjessa662@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2025 16:17:27 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain QueenJcloud writes: In the header part of this e-mail, we see this name/address > From: QueenJcloud which I know from the past exchange is different from what you want to be known as to this community (you have your preferred identity on the Signed-off-by: line we see below). In such a case, you can do one of two things. * Fix your mail client program so that it places your preferred identity on the "From:" header; or * Start the body of your message with an extra "in-body header", i.e. "From: Queen Ediri Jessa ", and a blank line to separate the in-body header from the body of the message. The former may be preferable, as you'd need to do so only once. > Add documentation to describe how the server responds when a client sends an > invalid 'want' line during the HTTP protocol exchange. This helps clarify the > behavior of Git when handling malformed or unknown object requests, and > ensures developers understand how such errors are reported. Is it describing what happens to be the behaviour of one implementation (namely, ours), or do all server implementations give identical error message? Back when the TODO: comment was written and back when there weren't other reimplementations of Git, by definition the error message our implementation give would have been the only official one. But now, it is way too late to declare "here is what our implementation gives out, so everybody else must do the same or they are in error". We'd need to clarify what the intention of this update is in this part of the proposed log message, something like "HTTP server implementation of git-core and jGit give different messages but since their messages share this and that characteristics, which is something any reasonable reimplementations of Git would sharee, specify that as the requirement here" (I am not claiming that it was what you did to come up with this patch and what you want the text of the patch to be taken as; I am just giving a rough illustration of the level of detail expected in the proposed log message to explain what backs the new text in the documentation and how seriously the server implementors need to take it). > If any "want" object is not reachable, send an error: > +When the client sends an invalid `want` line, the server responds with an > +appropriate error message indicating the invalid object request. This ensures > +the client can detect and handle protocol violations gracefully. > + > +For example, a malformed or unknown object hash in a `want` command will result > +in a response similar to: > + > + error invalid 'want' > + > +This helps maintain clear communication between client and server during > +fetch operations. I am not sure if the additional information given here is worth this many number of lines. Wouldn't something like this If any "want" object is not reachable, send an error message that includes the offending object name to help the client diagnose which "want" command was the bad one. tell the same thing more concisely and clearly? Thanks.