Subject: Re: [WIP 11/15] serve: introduce git-serve

From: Brandon Williams <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:25:30 -0800

On 12/07, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Brandon Williams <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
> > +static struct protocol_capability *get_capability(const char *key)
> > +{
> > +	int i;
> > +
> > +	if (!key)
> > +		return NULL;
> > +
> > +	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(capabilities); i++) {
> > +		struct protocol_capability *c = &capabilities[i];
> > +		const char *out;
> > +		if (skip_prefix(key, c->name, &out) && (!*out || *out == '='))
> > +			return c;
> 
> Looks familiar and resembles what was recently discussed on list ;-)
> 
> > +int cmd_serve(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> > +{
> > +
> > +	struct option options[] = {
> > +		OPT_END()
> > +	};
> > +
> > +	/* ignore all unknown cmdline switches for now */
> > +	argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix, options, grep_usage,
> > +			     PARSE_OPT_KEEP_DASHDASH |
> > +			     PARSE_OPT_KEEP_UNKNOWN);
> > +	serve();
> > +
> > +	return 0;
> > +}

I assume that at some point we may want to have a new endpoint that just
does v2 without needing the side channel to tell it to do so.  Maybe for
brand new server commands, like a remote grep or a remote object-stat or
something that don't have a v1 equivalent that can be fallen back to.
That's why I included a builtin/serve.c 

> > ...
> > +/* Main serve loop for protocol version 2 */
> > +void serve(void)
> > +{
> > +	/* serve by default supports v2 */
> > +	packet_write_fmt(1, "version 2\n");
> > +
> > +	advertise_capabilities();
> > +
> > +	for (;;)
> > +		if (process_request())
> > +			break;
> > +}
> 
> I am guessing that this would be run just like upload-pack,
> i.e. invoked via ssh or via git-daemon, and that is why it can just
> assume that fd#0/fd#1 are already connected to the other end.  It
> may be helpful to document somewhere how we envision to invoke this
> program.
> 

This function I was planning to just be executed by upload-pack and
receive-pack when a client requests protocol v2.  But yes the idea would
be that fd#0/fd#1 would be already setup like they are for upload-pack
and receive-pack.

-- 
Brandon Williams