On 08/30, Bryan Turner wrote: > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 10:29 AM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 03:53:21PM -0700, Brandon Williams wrote: > > > >> The biggest question I'm trying to answer is if these are reasonable ways with > >> which to communicate a request to a server to use a newer protocol, without > >> breaking current servers/clients. As far as I've tested, with patches 1-5 > >> applied I can still communicate with current servers without causing any > >> problems. > > > > Current git.git servers, I assume?. How much do we want to care about > > alternate implementations? I would not be surprised if other git:// > > implementations are more picky about cruft after the virtual-host field > > (though I double-checked GitHub's implementation at least, and it is > > fine). > > > > I don't think libgit2 implements the server side. That leaves probably > > JGit, Microsoft's VSTS (which I think is custom), and whatever Atlassian > > and GitLab use. > > Before I manually apply the patches to test how they work with > Bitbucket Server, are they applied on a branch somewhere where I can > just fetch them? If not, I'll apply them manually and verify. I just pushed this set of patches up to: https://github.com/bmwill/git/tree/protocol-v2 so you should be able to fetch them from there (saves you from having to manually applying the patches). > Just based on the description, though, I expect no issues. We don't > currently support the git:// protocol. Our HTTP handling passes > headers through to the receive-pack and upload-pack processes as > environment variables (with a little massaging), but doesn't consider > them itself; it only considers the URL and "service" query parameter > to decide what command to run and to detect "dumb" requests. Our SSH > handling ignores any environment variables provided and does not > forward them to the git process, similar to VSTS. > > I'll confirm explicitly, to be certain, but just based on reading the > overview and knowing our code I think the described approaches should > work fine. Perfect! Thanks for taking the time to verify that this will work. -- Brandon Williams
