Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:43:32 -0800 wireprotoserver: remove broken optimization for non-httplib client
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Thu, 08 Mar 2018 16:43:32 -0800] rev 36813
wireprotoserver: remove broken optimization for non-httplib client There was an experimental non-httplib client in core for several years. It was removed a week or so ago. We kept the optimization for this client in the server code. I'm not sure if that was intended or not. But it doesn't matter: the code was wrong. Because the code was accessing a WSGI environment dict, it needed to access the HTTP_X_HGHTTP2 key to actually read the HTTP header. So the code deleted by this commit wasn't actually doing anything meaningful. Doh. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2741
Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:58:52 -0800 wireprotoserver: move all wire protocol handling logic out of hgweb
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:58:52 -0800] rev 36812
wireprotoserver: move all wire protocol handling logic out of hgweb Previous patches from several days ago worked to isolate processing of HTTP wire protocol requests to wireprotoserver. We still had a little logic in hgweb. If feels like the right time to finish the job. This commit moves WSGI request servicing from hgweb to wireprotoserver. The ugly dict holding the parsed request is no more. I think the new code is cleaner. As part of this, we now process wire protocol requests before the block to obtain the "query" variable. This makes it clear that this wonky "query" variable is not used by the wire protocol. The wonkiest part about this code is the HTTP 404. I'm actually not sure what all is going on here. It looks like the code is trying to prevent URL with path components that specify a command from not working. That part I grok. What I don't grok is why we need to send a 404. I would think it would be OK to no-op and let another handler try to service the request. But if we do this, we get some subrepo test failures. So it looks like something is expecting the HTTP 404 and reacting to it in a specific way. It /might/ be possible to change the behavior here. But it isn't something I'm comfortable doing because I don't understand the problem space. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2740
Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:37:05 -0800 hgweb: use parsed request to construct query parameters
Gregory Szorc <gregory.szorc@gmail.com> [Thu, 08 Mar 2018 15:37:05 -0800] rev 36811
hgweb: use parsed request to construct query parameters The way hgweb routes requests is kind of bonkers. If PATH_INFO is set, we take the URL path after the repository. Otherwise, we take the first part of the query string before "&" and the part before ";" in that. We then kinda/sorta treat this as a path and route based on that. This commit ports that code to use the parsed request object. This required a new attribute on the parsed request to indicate whether there is any PATH_INFO. The new code still feels a bit convoluted for my liking. But we'll need to rewrite more of the code before a better solution becomes apparant. This code feels strictly better since we're no longer doing low-level WSGI manipulation during routing. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D2739
(0) -30000 -10000 -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -30 -10 -3 +3 +10 +30 +100 +300 +1000 +3000 +10000 tip