On Mon, 27 Aug 2007, Petr Baudis wrote: > On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 02:16:34AM CEST, Sven Verdoolaege wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 01:59:44AM +0200, Petr Baudis wrote: > > > So now I wonder, what is the thing you miss most there? Any cool stuff > > > repo.or.cz could (preferrably easily) do and doesn't? > > > > Just a minor nit, but how about dropping the "git+" from the > > Push URL? > > I'm a major proponent of the "git+" I'd say "only", not "major". It makes no sense. > - it's just the correct thing to specify. ssh:// by itself means secure > _shell_ No it isn't, and no it doesn't. It makes no sense what-so-ever. "ssh://" is the *protocol*. What is actually done over the protocol is specified by the program. This is not at all git specific. Try running "ssh" vs "scp" some day, and you'll notice the exact same thing: they both use the ssh _protocol_, but no, your statement that "ssh://" by itself means "secure _shell_" is total and utter garbage. It means nothing at all of the kind. "ssh://" means the ssh protocol. It is that unambiguous, and that simple. Saying "git+ssh://" is totally idiotic, always has been, and always will be. It's as stupid as it would be to require people to say scp cp+ssh://host/filename . and nobody sane would *ever* advocate something that stupid. It's not how it's done. So why do you continue to advocate "git+ssh://", when nobody else does, and several people have asked you not to. And yes, I realize that SVN does it. SVN for some unfathomable reason uses "svn+ssh://", but let's face it, the SVN developers have neither taste nor brains. They don't know any better. Linus - 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
