Default performance of ‘lp:foo’ URLs
mnordhoff at mattnordhoff.com
Tue Dec 1 09:46:32 GMT 2009
Aaron Bentley wrote:
> Jonathan Lange wrote:
>> However, if anyone feels strongly enough about this to provide some
>> patches for this, I'd be happy to help them.
> I think we should implement bzr+http support for code hosting. bzr will
> automatically detect bzr+http support at http URLs, so we won't have to
> change the lookup mechanism, and http will get through more firewalls
> than bzr protocol. It also avoids increasing the number of protocol
> options we provide to users.
I second bzr+http. "bzr+ssh://email@example.com/" would
only help users going forward, while bzr+http helps every user who is
already using http:// now.
OTOH, IIRC someone said that anonymous bzr+ssh doesn't require an
upgrade to bzrlib.plugins.launchpad, just a change to the web service,
so users would not have to upgrade Bazaar to take advantage of it. And
those who are already using http:// have already downloaded the history;
now they're just doing small pulls, so they wouldn't benefit *that*
much. Plus, there have got to be a few people behind HTTP proxies that
will freak out, meaning service would be *worse* for them.
But...even though it's not very significant, I'm still sad that http://
users wouldn't get anything.
It would be neat to use branch references on the http:// side to thunk
everybody over to bzr+ssh, but that would be confusing ("Why is this
http:// URL asking me about my SSH password?") and would totally break
things for users stuck behind firewalls that block SSH.
(Actually, my favorite idea is adding both bzr+http and anonymous
bzr+ssh, but I imagine the programmers and sysadmins will lynch me if I
suggest it. ;-)
So...yeah. Matthew's $0.80 worth of rambling. :-D
(P.S.: Ben Finney, I think something is wrong with your SMTP server. The
one time I got a useful error message, it said ben+bazaar doesn't exist.
OTOH, I think my SMTP server is being funny as well.)
More information about the bazaar