From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB371C77B73 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2023 05:50:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242880AbjD0FuQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Apr 2023 01:50:16 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53094 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229455AbjD0FuO (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Apr 2023 01:50:14 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x429.google.com (mail-pf1-x429.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::429]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83CBF3585 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2023 22:50:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x429.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-63b5c4c769aso10122862b3a.3 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2023 22:50:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1682574613; x=1685166613; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=Pie2gKBBccNSO98hbU1nOWl+2fW4EEIbUy7Xxqy9SkE=; b=UTpLGrPpytLcoDRwLCWiMZq9/l/nZk+GRQPU6rWX/RBXXpSNKyE98yKle91s4k0Nk8 9sTQAEeW30cE1y8ax15g3m3DlMFSlfQQScs5Yrq87r5FZOKFO3cNosWppRSYiA/VA4wx fepNfzH9Vw1ATycCW5eeGU8oYRNcQGFJnRSB8D/koLFl2NPZ+uMS2QyxzIzPruDZZ/RX Z6MQws1PjYXdFHyhBmm/KuiBFZOd60cOJODCuKjRVmWL+JCR2ZiVgOOkdISC0qXdwX9x m4n2/GACRK055P4IzNJHC3ECegghQj1dWWvz8JLPliV3kVx18HMeFa6guJDMyJOV0iIG yYBw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1682574613; x=1685166613; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:sender:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=Pie2gKBBccNSO98hbU1nOWl+2fW4EEIbUy7Xxqy9SkE=; b=JKW1f6GVPKkKCDooq7SJkIznsuMGwhhDQ7D8loQjcVkK1VKVrEvPLWHkiKb1GkRdJX 6pWT5vUdFmlMz37zCBdEMZp/7KGagVPGkuWN40r4pRC3g5zMtgYZsAHiUKyyffo26oZg spJf5BLH7FJbNKnGId/rVhnPSVmW4Ko0QK/6a9aeP9qUtp7PCXGIV9NY0cjs3bt0oddx +j1SJ0o+6uC5H+2hJjzVrcg3p+PV0mOWhEs3b+XgqztVFvZn+MYx6b6ka7LOZdSEbUPc Eukn7zDBgHdtsMSBGbHWQyNlmLr5mfh1BJA43wlOkA4rI4hpeh+qQ5ixMlRpsn74jMuD 0jLQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AC+VfDz9EBnj4Tjq+5TJ+urebxdI5CWr2B32ldIWq2GzMk3cuij62r1S 73x270nbB/ODPxx/hf1JhJ0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACHHUZ4ChwekGtiIHGuln7wuGtD6KwyQyESEbgFJrRrSigBEbuSOt1kr16HKQVc+SyW3CzgUuwy9NA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:2d1b:b0:63b:854c:e0f6 with SMTP id fa27-20020a056a002d1b00b0063b854ce0f6mr802040pfb.21.1682574612799; Wed, 26 Apr 2023 22:50:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (187.137.203.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.203.137.187]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w66-20020a628245000000b0063f16daf7dbsm10696630pfd.55.2023.04.26.22.50.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 26 Apr 2023 22:50:12 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Junio C Hamano From: Junio C Hamano To: ZheNing Hu Cc: ZheNing Hu via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Zeger-Jan van de Weg Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] transport: add --show-service option References: Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 22:50:12 -0700 In-Reply-To: (ZheNing Hu's message of "Thu, 27 Apr 2023 12:35:23 +0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org ZheNing Hu writes: >> The above is a very well written description of why we _can_ do >> this, but it is unclear why we would _want_ to do this. What do we >> gain by letting the individual services to declare "we are serving >> this!"? Do we lose an extra fork & process (it does not seem to be >> the case)? > > When I was implementing a small git http server, I wanted to delegate > everything to upload-pack and receive-pack. Everything else was fine, > the only thing I was not satisfied with was the need to send an additional > "#service=$servername" message when the protocol is v1. I think you had a brief mention on that after the three-dash separator; it *is* a relevant piece of information that needs to be in the proposed log message. Thanks.