What do your new ideas say about commits? Will it be possible to have
a single-HTTP-request commit, or will we still be stuck with the
"commits are a random series of events in a random undocumented order
that probably go to different backends"?
--dave
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 8:45 AM, Ben Collins-Sussman
<sussman_at_red-bean.com> wrote:
> Last month I started a couple of threads about my intent to completely
> rewrite our HTTP network protocol.
>
> I had originally pushed very hard for writing an entirely new
> standalone apache module (mod_svn), which could then provide support
> for WebDAV and older clients by deferring requests to mod_dav_svn
> running "behind" it. My idea was to model the svnserve protocol -- do
> exactly one network turnaround for each RA function. My hope is that
> this would give us speed somewhat close to svnserve.
>
> On the plane out to Apachecon New Orleans, I had an opportunity to
> really read ra_serf's code and understand what it's doing for each RA
> function. I ended up persuading myself that if we can eliminate all
> of the DeltaV "discovery" formalities (i.e. cut out all of the extra
> PROPFINDs that precede so many different types of requests), we end up
> with an HTTP protocol that's about 95% the same as what I would have
> written from scratch anyway. Very sane and readable.
>
> This is the point where cmpilato, gstein, jerenkrantz, and many others
> all get to scream "I told you so". :-)
>
> In any case, I had a late-night face-to-face design meeting with
> {gstein, jerenkrantz, striker, pquerna, fitz} and as a group we worked
> out all of the details of exactly how we want to change our existing
> protocol. I'll be committing some massive updates to the
> notes/http-protocol-v2.txt file very soon for everyone to look at. In
> a nutshell, though: we're going to abandon DeltaV formalities and just
> let the client *assume* the format of different types of URLs; the
> client will be able to construct them all by itself.
>
> Meanwhile, in the same spirit of abandoning DeltaV, we want to do
> something we've been discussing doing for (literally) years:
> annnouncing a completely open syntax for fetching (rev,path) objects
> over HTTP. In the past, people have sort of figured out that
> "!svn/bc/REV/path" is the sooper-sekrit syntax, but we've warned
> people not to depend on it. No more of that. We'd like to officially
> support what source-browsers and other tools have already been doing
> for years:
>
> path?r=REV
>
> I already have a smallpatch for mod_dav_svn to support this, and look
> forward to others' review of it. It's really quite a tiny change, so
> I'd like to see it go out in 1.6 if nobody objects. I'll then have 6
> months to do all the 'big' protocol changes for 1.7.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
>
>
--
David Glasser | glasser@davidglasser.net | http://www.davidglasser.net/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_subversion.tigris.org
Received on 2008-11-05 23:15:34 CET