[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multi-committer functionality revisited

From: Tom Lord
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] multi-committer functionality revisited
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 13:49:44 -0800 (PST)

    > From: address@hidden
    > >     > From: Robert Collins <address@hidden>

    > >     > Sorry, I wasn't clear. This is how url's are formed: there's no 
    > >     > about it.

    > > I don't think so.  Cites?

    > read the RFC.

This is a very long document.  Scanning it, I see no specific language
that covers this case.  So, would you care to cite the specific
language that you think applies?

    > 3.1 says that the % is not allowed where you put it for example.
    > >     > A URL as a uniform locator isn't intrinsically client or server 
    > >     > Indeed for something like http://, a URL doesn't define *many* 
    > >     > of the request: PUT vs POST ve GET cs SEARCH vs ....

    > > PUT, POST, GET, etc. are parts of the http protocol.
    > ...
    > > They modify the path, not the protocol.  The umask thing modifies the
    > > protocol.

    > So by this reasoning there should also be a http%method=POST: protocol.
    > Thats just silly.

No, that is not analogous reasoning.

To properly use the URI of an sftp- or file-accessible archive with a
umask setting, a client must use a different protocol than it would
when using sftp: or file:.    You could regard the umask varients as
new protocols that happen to be layered on sftp: and file: but are,
nevertheless, distinct from them.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]