Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/3] protocol v2

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> One of the biggest problems of a new protocol would be deployment
> as the users probably would not care too deeply. It should just
> work in the sense that the user should not even sense that the
> protocol changed.

Agreed.

> To do so we need to make sure the protocol
> is backwards compatible and works if an old client talks to
> a new server as well as the other way round.

It's very hard to keep backward compatibility if you want to stop the
initial ref adverstisement, costly when there are lots of refs. But we
can let both protocols run in parallel, with the old one advertise the
presence of the new one. Then the client could switch to new protocol
gradually. This way new protocol could forget about backward
compatibility. See

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/215054/focus=244325
-- 
Duy
--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]