Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> I don't see how what you are talking about is any different. With the >> mapping the executable of the alternative implementation still needs >> to have a different name, no? > > Sure, but please search for "second class citizen" in my message. Also "extra level of indication". I do not think "remote-curl" was the best name, and hindsight tells me that "remote-walker" might have been a better name (it tells us how it does it more clearly). And I do not at all mind making the current hard-coded mapping from http:// to remote-walker to an external table look-up, perhaps something that can be controlled by .git/config, with a built-in default that is hard-coded like the way we have now. After all my main objection is against closing the door to others by one particular implementation squating on "remote-http" name and refusing the use of that nice, authoritative-sounding name by others. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html