On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 02:02:49PM -0700, Shawn Walker wrote:
> On 08/ 5/10 01:20 PM, [email protected] wrote:
> >I'm also a bit concerned about how we determine whether POST for file/1
> >is enabled by the client.  Up to this point, the versions/0 information
> >tells us whether the depot supports a particular operation, and what
> >versions are supported.  If a depot isn't providing a particular
> >operation, the operation string is absent in the versions/0 information.
> >However, with file/1, we can support GET file/1, but not POST file/1.
> >The versions/0 information doesn't currently have a way of expressing
> >this.  Shawn may not agree with me, but perhaps add_cert, or whatever
> >you had before, is actually preferable?  Thoughts?
> 
> add_cert isn't preferable was we ultimately need a generic file
> upload mechanism anyway, which is all that's being done here.
> There's nothing about this operation that makes it specific to
> certs.
> 
> I don't think it's desirable to have a separate operation for every
> possible variant of an existing operation.  And as I've mentioned
> before, from an HTTP standpoint, it makes more sense to support PUT,
> GET, etc. for a single part of the namespace and reject operations
> as appropriate.

How do you propose that we determine if POST file/1 is enabled?  Try and
fail isn't presently feasibile.  When we developed the new transport,
the plan was to use versions/0 to see what operations a depot supported,
and only contact the depots that support the desired version.

-j
_______________________________________________
pkg-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/pkg-discuss

Reply via email to