On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 10:21:55AM -0800, Brandon Williams wrote: > > Hmm, so this would accept stuff like "refs/heads/*/foo" but quietly > > ignore the "/foo" part. > > Yeah that's true...this should probably not do that. Since > "refs/heads/*/foo" violates what the spec is, really this should error > out as an invalid pattern.
Yeah, that would be better, I think. > > It also accepts "refs/h*" to get "refs/heads" and "refs/hello". I think > > it's worth going for the most-restrictive thing to start with, since > > that enables a lot more server operations without worrying about > > breaking compatibility. > > And just to clarify what do you see as being the most-restrictive case > of patterns that would should use? I mean only accepting "*" at a "/" boundary (or just allowing a trailing slash to imply recursion, like "refs/heads/", or even just always assuming recursion to allow "refs/heads"). -Peff
