Re: [PATCH 0/12] git_config_string() considered harmful

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Apr 7, 2024, 01:08 UTC
Message-ID: <20240407010858.GA1076556@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20240407005656.GA436890@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Sat, Apr 06, 2024 at 08:56:56PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/12] git_config_string() considered harmful
> [...]
>   [01/11]: config: make sequencer.c's git_config_string_dup() public
>   [02/11]: config: add git_config_pathname_dup()
>   [03/11]: config: prefer git_config_string_dup() for temp variables
>   [04/11]: config: use git_config_string_dup() for open-coded equivalents
>   [05/11]: config: use git_config_string_dup() to fix leaky open coding
>   [06/11]: config: use git_config_string() in easy cases
>   [07/11]: config: use git_config_pathname_dup() in easy cases
>   [08/11]: http: use git_config_string_dup()
>   [09/11]: merge: use git_config_string_dup() for pull strategies
>   [10/11]: userdiff: use git_config_string_dup() when we can
>   [11/11]: blame: use "dup" string_list for ignore-revs files

The cover letter subject is wrong, of course. :) I wrote it manually and ended up squashing two of the patches at the last minute.

-Peff