On 06/07, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 06 2018, Brandon Williams wrote:
>
> > On 06/05, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 05 2018, Brandon Williams wrote:
> >>
> >> > +uploadpack.allowRefInWant::
> >> > +If this option is set, `upload-pack` will suppor
On Wed, Jun 06 2018, Brandon Williams wrote:
> On 06/05, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 05 2018, Brandon Williams wrote:
>>
>> > +uploadpack.allowRefInWant::
>> > + If this option is set, `upload-pack` will support the `ref-in-want`
>> > + feature of the protocol version 2 `f
On 06/05, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jun 05 2018, Brandon Williams wrote:
>
> > +uploadpack.allowRefInWant::
> > + If this option is set, `upload-pack` will support the `ref-in-want`
> > + feature of the protocol version 2 `fetch` command.
> > +
>
> I think it makes sense to
On Tue, Jun 05 2018, Brandon Williams wrote:
> +uploadpack.allowRefInWant::
> + If this option is set, `upload-pack` will support the `ref-in-want`
> + feature of the protocol version 2 `fetch` command.
> +
I think it makes sense to elaborate a bit on what this is for. Having
read this
On 05/06/18 18:51, Brandon Williams wrote:
> Currently, while performing packfile negotiation, clients are only
> allowed to specify their desired objects using object ids. This causes
> a vulnerability to failure when an object turns non-existent during
> negotiation, which may happen if, for
Currently, while performing packfile negotiation, clients are only
allowed to specify their desired objects using object ids. This causes
a vulnerability to failure when an object turns non-existent during
negotiation, which may happen if, for example, the desired repository is
provided by multipl
6 matches
Mail list logo