| Message ID | 20200513005424.81369-3-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | SHA-256 part 2/3: protocol functionality | expand |
On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 02:56, brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> wrote: > @@ -189,7 +204,6 @@ refs being sent. > > Clients MAY use the parameters from this capability to select the proper initial > branch when cloning a repository. > - > shallow > ------- Looks like a spurious line deletion snuck in. Martin
Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com> writes: > On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 02:56, brian m. carlson > <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> wrote: > >> @@ -189,7 +204,6 @@ refs being sent. >> >> Clients MAY use the parameters from this capability to select the proper initial >> branch when cloning a repository. >> - >> shallow >> ------- > > Looks like a spurious line deletion snuck in. Indeed. I wonder if that is why our documentation build fails near the tip of 'pu'.
On 2020-05-14 at 01:12:19, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com> writes: > > > On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 02:56, brian m. carlson > > <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> wrote: > > > >> @@ -189,7 +204,6 @@ refs being sent. > >> > >> Clients MAY use the parameters from this capability to select the proper initial > >> branch when cloning a repository. > >> - > >> shallow > >> ------- > > > > Looks like a spurious line deletion snuck in. > > Indeed. I wonder if that is why our documentation build fails near > the tip of 'pu'. I'll definitely do a reroll this weekend and kick a basic doc build off before I send it out.
"brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> writes: > On 2020-05-14 at 01:12:19, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com> writes: >> >> > On Wed, 13 May 2020 at 02:56, brian m. carlson >> > <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> wrote: >> > >> >> @@ -189,7 +204,6 @@ refs being sent. >> >> >> >> Clients MAY use the parameters from this capability to select the proper initial >> >> branch when cloning a repository. >> >> - >> >> shallow >> >> ------- >> > >> > Looks like a spurious line deletion snuck in. >> >> Indeed. I wonder if that is why our documentation build fails near >> the tip of 'pu'. > > I'll definitely do a reroll this weekend and kick a basic doc build off > before I send it out. FWIW, I've fixed it up on my end so the documentation build of 'pu' has been working OK.
diff --git a/Documentation/technical/protocol-capabilities.txt b/Documentation/technical/protocol-capabilities.txt index 2b267c0da6..026c42f86a 100644 --- a/Documentation/technical/protocol-capabilities.txt +++ b/Documentation/technical/protocol-capabilities.txt @@ -176,6 +176,21 @@ agent strings are purely informative for statistics and debugging purposes, and MUST NOT be used to programmatically assume the presence or absence of particular features. +object-format +------------- + +This capability, which takes a hash algorithm as an argument, indicates +that the server supports the given hash algorithms. It may be sent +multiple times; if so, the first one given is the one used in the ref +advertisement. + +When provided by the client, this indicates that it intends to use the +given hash algorithm to communicate. The algorithm provided must be one +that the server supports. + +If this capability is not provided, it is assumed that the only +supported algorithm is SHA-1. + symref ------ @@ -189,7 +204,6 @@ refs being sent. Clients MAY use the parameters from this capability to select the proper initial branch when cloning a repository. - shallow -------
Document a capability that indicates which hash algorithms are in use by both sides of a remote connection. Use the term "object-format", since this is the term used for the repository extension as well. Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> --- .../technical/protocol-capabilities.txt | 16 +++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)