2 ms·

One (IMO reasonable) objection/confusion might be that the the repo URL is the exact same as the web page, i.e. the actual posted article. When coming from git

by unwind 4y ago

One (IMO reasonable) objection/confusion might be that the the repo URL is the exact same as the web page, i.e. the actual posted article. When coming from git/Mercurial/subversion etc as I do, it is at least mildly weird that the Bazaar repo address is the same as the address of a web document. The two objects are not (at least in my world) the same, so why should they share URIs? Edit: deduped.

Karellen 4y ago
Because sending different content based on the content-type the user-agent asks for, e.g. with the "Accept:" header, has explicitly been part of the HTTP spec since version 1.1 in 1997? https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2068#section-12 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2068#section-12 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2068#section-14.1 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc2068#section-14.1 See also https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Content_negotiation https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Content_ne... (FWIW - I don't know if that's how `bzr` does this, but it might, and the concept is 25 years old now.) Edit: s/different content/different representations of the same resource/
- unwind 4y ago
  True of course, didn't think about that. I'm not a web developer. :) Still think it's weird and kind of against my feeling for the spirit of a URI, but that's just me. Thanks.
easrng 4y ago
You can git clone normal GitHub URLs without the .git at the end too.