On Sun, Apr 28, 2024 at 10:30:48PM +0000, Matheus Moreira via GitGitGadget wrote:
> Git commands accept a wide variety of URLs syntaxes, not just standard URLs.
> This can make parsing git URLs difficult since standard URL parsers cannot
> be used. Even if an external parser were implemented, it would have to track
> git's development closely in case support for any new URL schemes are added.
>
> These patches introduce a new url-parse builtin command that exposes git's
> native URL parsing algorithms as a plumbing command, allowing other programs
> to then call upon git itself to parse the git URLs and their components.
>
> This should be quite useful for scripts. For example, a script might want to
> add remotes to repositories, naming them according to the domain name where
> the repository is hosted. This new builtin allows it to parse the git URL
> and extract its host name which can then be used as input for other
> operations. This would be difficult to implement otherwise due to git's
> support for scp style URLs.
>
All in all, having a URL parser as such is a good thing, thanks for working
on that.
There are, however, some notes and questions, up for discussion:
- are there any plans to integrate the parser into connect.c and fetch ?
Speaking as a person, who manage to break the parsing of URLs once,
with the good intention to improve things, I need to learn that
test cases are important.
Some work can be seen in t5601-clone.sh
Especially, when dealing with literal IPv6 addresses, the ones with []
and the simplified ssh syntax 'myhost:src' are interesting to test.
Git itself strives to be RFC compliant when parsing URLs, but
we do not fully guarantee to be "fully certified".
And some features using the [] syntax to embedd a port number
inside the simplified ssh syntax had not been documented,
but used in practise, and are now part of the test suite.
See "[myhost:123]:src" in t5601
- Or is this new tool just a helper, to verify "good" URL's,
and not accepting our legacy parser quirks ?
Then we still should see some IPv6 tests ?
Or may be not, as we prefer hostnames these days ?
- One minor comment:
in 02/13 we read:
+enum protocol {
+ PROTO_UNKNOWN = 0,
+ PROTO_LOCAL,
+ PROTO_FILE,
+ PROTO_SSH,
+ PROTO_GIT,
The RFC 1738 uses the term "scheme" here, and using the very generic
term "protocol" may lead to name clashes later.
Would something like "git_scheme" or so be better ?
- One minor comment:
In 13/13 we read:
+ git url-parse "file:///" &&
+ git url-parse "file://"
I think that the "///" version is superflous, it should already
be covered by the "//" version
