On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 09:32:41AM +0700, Bagas Sanjaya wrote: > > but this has a few issues: > > > > - it's not necessarily portable. The http2 apache module might not be > > available on all systems. Further, the http2 module isn't compatible > > with the prefork mpm, so we have to switch to something else. But we > > don't necessarily know what's available. It would be nice if we > > could have conditional config, but IfModule only tells us if a > > module is already loaded, not whether it is available at all. > > > > This might be a non-issue. The http tests are already optional, and > > modern-enough systems may just have both of these. But... > > > > - if we do this, then we'd no longer be testing HTTP/1.1 at all. I'm > > not sure how much that matters since it's all handled by curl under > > the hood, but I'd worry that some detail leaks through. We'd > > probably want two scripts running similar tests, one with HTTP/2 and > > one with HTTP/1.1. > > Maybe for httpd config we can say that if mpm_prefork isn't loaded, load > mpm_event and mod_http2. That doesn't work. We can say "is mpm_prefork" loaded, and indeed we already do, in order to load mpm_prefork! That's because the module may or may not be built-in, and if not, we have to load it (or some mpm module). See 296f0b3ea9 (t/lib-httpd/apache.conf: configure an MPM module for apache 2.4, 2013-06-09). But we have no way of knowing _which_ modules are available. It may just be that "event" or "worker" (both of which support mod_http2) are available close enough to everywhere that we can just guess. > And for testing both HTTP/2 and HTTP/1.1 did you mean sharing the same test > code (with adjustments for each protocol)? Yes. I'd literally run the same battery of tests against both protocols (see my other response to Taylor with a sketched-out example). I'm still not sure it's entirely worth the effort, though. The underlying transport should be pretty transparent to Git, with the exception of things like debugging output. -Peff
