Quoting David Symonds <dsymonds@gmail.com>:

quoted text
> Well, my original point, which I carefully disguised with my
> misunderstanding of git:// URLs, was that the URL should be enough to
> locate the resource (say, a git repo); you shouldn't restrict what
> those resources are used for, so that the URLs *can* be for more than
> just git, because they are Uniform, and they only *locate* a resource,
> not define how it is used.

There is still the question though - "located by _whom_?"   IMHO, the  
answer to that question determines the _different contexts_ for these  
URLs.  When I'm specifying a URL on a git command line (e.g. "git  
clone /url/to/some/repo"), it does seem redundant to say the least to  
have to always prefix the underlying protocol with "git+". (I think  
Linus had a good point here, in that if we were to say "git clone  
git+ssh://...", we should also say "git clone git+rsync://..." etc.  
for the sake of consistency.)

On the other hand, if we were to get to a point where we would like to  
be able to feed a URL to a 3rd-party tool, say, konqueror, and have it  
recognize that it is a git resource and access as such, then under  
_that_ context, I would agree that it is definitely necessary to have  
the protocol somehow indicates that it's "git'ish", be it "git+ssh" or  
"gits" or whatever.

-- 
Jing Xue

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html