On 28/08/07, David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx> wrote: > "David Symonds" <dsymonds@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On 28/08/07, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> And that is how it was designed to be. The URL's are for *git*, not > >> for other uses. If you want to do cross-SCM tools, you need to let > >> them know it's a "git" thing wheher it's browsable or not, so the > >> argument that ssh is something "different" is bogus crapola. > > > > That throws out the *U* of *URL*, which stands for Uniform. If you > > have to say whether a URL is a "git" URL or some other kind of URL, > > it's no longer a Uniform Resource Locator. > > Huh? Do you think a URL "http:" ceases to be a URL if there is > browser-specific code behind it? Well, my original point, which I carefully disguised with my misunderstanding of git:// URLs, was that the URL should be enough to locate the resource (say, a git repo); you shouldn't restrict what those resources are used for, so that the URLs *can* be for more than just git, because they are Uniform, and they only *locate* a resource, not define how it is used. > It doesn't to me. Not least of all because rsync does not work using > URLs to start with. Can all of the U-is-Universal-flouting people > read the manual pages of the utilities they are advertising? Sorry, I meant something like wget. Those keys are close together, heh. Dave. - 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
