Re: Handling of paths
- From
Charles Bailey <charles@hashpling.org>
- Date
- Jul 20, 2017, 20:05 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20170720200523.GA13792@hashpling.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqq7ez2lwsv.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 12:42:40PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 12 quoted lines
> Victor Toni <victor.toni@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > What's unexpected is that paths used for sslKey or sslCert are treated
> > differently insofar as they are expected to be absolute.
> > Relative paths (whether with or without "~") don't work.
>
> It appears that only two of these among four were made aware of the
> "~[username]/" prefix in bf9acba2 ("http: treat config options
> sslCAPath and sslCAInfo as paths", 2015-11-23), but "sslkey" and
> "sslcert" were still left as plain vanilla strings. I do not know
> if that was an elaborate omission, or a mere oversight, as it seems
> that it happened while I was away, so...It was more of an oversight than a deliberate omission, but more accurately I didn't actively consider whether the other http.ssl* variables were pathname-like or not.
At the time I was trying to make a config which needed to set http.sslCAPath and/or http.sslCAInfo more portable between users and these were "obviously" pathname-like to me. Now that I read the help for http.sslCert and http.sslKey, I see no reason that they shouldn't also use git_config_pathname. If I'd been more thorough I would have proposed this at the time.
Charles.