From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2AA71F9E0 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 18:18:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728563AbgD1SSR (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:18:17 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:52118 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728392AbgD1SSP (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:18:15 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17933CED46; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:18:14 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=JDKu9BddZ9hB cOwTx5oW1zx949I=; b=n+i+BweNgSZy2DdzWykgxnVpAosU4pId5P/BMYM+GduN hyUUXoYWCBuVMM8yhWW32vsKk2+k/VX5ATSzYEwjZta02mfdRmhxQExf7UJfUg6i 4LaaBkngafMNn1tEYaF4sMykJ+tyfQ6wd8lzMTy351bo1XelnHPD0z3Xg23+zXo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=im/FZR WQDc61+cFbY8wWWpq0brZllIt2IaKB9802VOeM8aKGM6B21/OJttEBvV6udmVEll NT2WHdR7vt+npRTUy+cqY5ue8yPv8JJSJIlwpESY/1vg22g0lfWgL1zaf1ywPl0r uBbeXobmFJQL1i2WoUH9V1HRplMhpGSqE9nAY= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FADECED45; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:18:14 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4CDA4CED43; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:18:11 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Eric Sunshine Cc: Carlo Marcelo Arenas =?utf-8?Q?Bel=C3=B3n?= , Git List , Dirk , Jeff King , Jonathan Nieder Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] credential-store: document the file format a bit more References: <20200428104858.28573-1-carenas@gmail.com> <20200428105254.28658-1-carenas@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 11:18:09 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Eric Sunshine's message of "Tue, 28 Apr 2020 12:06:55 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 9E510D66-897C-11EA-91CF-8D86F504CC47-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Eric Sunshine writes: > On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 6:53 AM Carlo Marcelo Arenas Bel=C3=B3n > wrote: >> Reading a malformed credential URL line and silently ignoring it >> does not mean that we promise to torelate and/or keep empty lines >> and "# commented" lines forever. >> >> Some people seem to take anything that is not explicitly forbidden >> as allowed, but the world does not work that way. >> >> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano >> --- >> diff --git a/Documentation/git-credential-store.txt b/Documentation/gi= t-credential-store.txt >> @@ -94,6 +94,10 @@ stored on its own line as a URL like: >> +No other kinds of lines (e.g. empty lines or comment lines) are >> +allowed in the file, even though some may be silently ignored. Do >> +not view or edit the file with editors. > > I suggest dropping the "even though some may be silently ignored" bit > since it's both mysterious (providing no concrete information) and > unnecessarily confusing since it flat out contradicts the earlier part > of the sentence. The fact that the implementation has accidentally > been loose in its parsing doesn't warrant introducing such ambiguity > into the (newly-added) documentation. I do not think it is an ambiguity. The phrase is there just to remind the readers that they are not allowed to take a loose implementation in the past as an excuse to throw in crufts and expect the result to continue working.