Re: [PATCH] http: http.emptyauth should allow empty (not just NULL) usernames
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Oct 3, 2016, 21:58 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20161003215840.6ihqjtplkcsporiw@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <335996ca2642478386e94d9f3dc43223@exmbdft7.ad.twosigma.com>
On Mon, Oct 03, 2016 at 09:54:19PM +0000, David Turner wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> > I dunno. The code path you are changing _only_ affects anything if the > > http.emptyauth config is set. But I guess I just don't understand why you > > would say "http://@gitserver" in the first place. Is that a common thing? > > I have no idea if it is common. I know that we do it.
I guess my question is: _why_ do you do it? Or more specifically, does http://gitserver.example.com" with http.emptyauth not work, and why?
From your response, I _think_ the answer is "no, it doesn't, and I have no clue why".
So I dunno. It is annoying not to know what is actually going on, but I'm OK with it if we don't think there's a high chance of regressing any other workflows (which I guess not, because http.emptyauth seems to be a Kerberos-specific hack in the first place).
-Peff