[PATCH] httprepo: long arguments support (issue2126)

[Steven Brown]

On 22 March 2011 04:04, Peter Arrenbrecht <peter.arrenbrecht at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman <dirkjan at ochtman.nl> wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 16:27, Matt Mackall <mpm at selenic.com> wrote:
>>> One of the reasons we were focusing on stashing stuff in headers is that
>>> some folks might be relying on non-push requests being GETs in their web
>>> server access rules. I'm not sure if this is a real problem, though.
>>> Obviously, a POST approach is a lot cleaner.
>>
>> Meh, I don't like it. I guess our protocol is already more RPC-like
>> than REST-like, but I would rather strive to keep idempotent requests
>> as GET and use POST only for the unbundle command.
>
> For caching and such? Would be a reason to teach Hg to use the POST
> variant only for large requests. We could see if the new discovery can
> work sufficiently well with request sizes that fit into GETs (for
> repos with reasonable numbers of heads).
> -parren
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel
>

Fine by me, as long as we choose a fairly small maximum URL length
(1K?) to provide compatibility with as many web servers as possible.