Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> (1) If there are multiple symrefs to report, we have to keep
> re-sending the server capabilities (I think you mentioned this in
> the subthread with Shawn).
This is nothing new, so there is nothing to complain about here.
The ref advertisement section is not very extensible to begin with and we
should consider ourselves lucky that Sergey Vlasov found the hole
(cf. $gmane/10710) we are exploiting to carry "server capabilities"; I do
not think we should nor can stuff any more than absolute minimum in the
section.
> (3) If HEAD doesn't point to a valid object, we have no place to put
> the symref. Or is it kosher to say
>
> 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 HEAD\0...\0refs/heads/master
>
> ? I think it would be nice eventually to be able to clone a HEAD
> pointing to yet-to-be-born branch.
I think sending 0{40} would break older clients, but older clients cannot
clone from an empty repository anyway, so that should not be so bad. I
however do not think it is such a big thing to be able to clone void
anyway.
You just have to train yourself to announce that your repository is
clonable _after_ making it actually clonable.
--
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
