On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 10:34:44AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: > > Sadly you cannot use a capability to fix that, because all of this > > happens before the client agrees to any capabilities (you can find > > discussion of a "v2" protocol on the list which solves this, but it's > > sort of languishing in the design phase). > > As a potential 1.1 version, which could work in a backward-compatible > way with existing servers and no additional round-trip: what if, in the > smart HTTP protocol, the client advertised client capabilities with an > additional HTTP header (e.g. "Git-Client-Caps: symrefs othershiny > featurenames"? git-http-backend could then pass those capabilities to > git-upload-pack (--client-caps='...'), which could take them into > account in the initial response? > > That wouldn't work as a single-pass approach for SSH, since the client > can't know if the server's upload-pack supports --client-caps, but it > would work for the smart HTTP protocol. You can dig up the discussion on the list under the name "protocol v2", but basically yes, that approach has been considered. It's a little gross just because it leaves other protocols behind http (and it is not necessarily a good idea to push people into http, because it has some fundamental drawbacks over the other protocols because of its half-duplex nature). > > That should Just Work over the existing http protocol without requiring > > an extra request. > > It'd require one extra request for git ls-remote, which normally doesn't > need the second round-trip, but that still seems reasonable. Good point. I don't think there's an easy way around that short of v2 or v1.1 that you mention above. I agree it's probably reasonable, though. -Peff -- 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