Calvin Wan <calvinwan@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > If a user wants one url to push/fetch to, then he defines 'url' > If a user wants to push to multiple urls, then he can either define meaning "the user wants to push to multiple, but never wants to fetch from the other ones"? If so, then ... > multiple urls or pushurls (one of the pushurls can be the same as the url). ... using multiple urls is not desirable as it becomes hard to tell which one should be used for fetching. When you define additional places you want to publish to, you do not expect to see that new definition affect where you fetch from. In a sense, using the first one to fetch, not the last one, gives us less damage, for that reason. Adding more URLs would not change where you fetch from. But still, I think what you gave is a good rule, regardless of the answer to the "which among multiple non-push urls do we fetch" question. If we were designing this part of the system from scratch, we probably - would have forbidden multiple URLs, or - would allowed multiple URLs, but used the 'last one wins', or - would allowed multiple URLs, but and used later ones as fallback, only to be used when earlier ones fail. It certainly is not a designed behaviour what we do when we have multiple URLs, but if we haven't changed how we react to such a configuration in the past (and I do not think we ever did), changing the behaviour in any way this late in the game likely breaks real users' configuration. Thanks.
