Re: [RFC] Fourth round of support for cloning submodules

From: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date: May 24, 2007, 07:29 UTC
Message-ID: <20070524072945.GO28023@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070524072216.GE942MdfPADPa@greensroom.kotnet.org>

Sven Verdoolaege <skimo@kotnet.org> wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 05:50:42PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> > >
> > > I am sorry to complain so late in the game, but I am not really interested 
> > > in submodules. However, what you say here is not a task for git-config 
> > > IMHO, but rather for git-remote.
> > 
> > Honestly speaking, I do not think people have no business
> > peeking into configuratoin remote repository has, and it would
> > be preferrable that supermodule Porcelain stuff does not rely on
> > that.
> 
> Maybe there are too many negations in that sentence, but are you
> saying it is ok to look into the remote configuration or not?

I think its OK to look at *your* .git/config to see what is configured for the remotes, (e.g. git config remote.origin.url) but it is NOT OK to look at the *remote*'s .git/config to see what they have configured.

Why? Their configuration is their configuration. Who knows what they have stored there. Look at the recent cvsserver config options, there's now a lot of information about the SQL database that backs cvsserver. That stuff shouldn't be public.

If you want to publish something for a client to fetch, it should be done by publishing a Git object referenced by a proper ref: blob, tree, commit, tag, take your pick.

-- 
Shawn.