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: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B29B1F461 for ; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 16:28:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731950AbfHZQ2D (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 12:28:03 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:58643 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731288AbfHZQ2D (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Aug 2019 12:28:03 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AA8F73033; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 12:28:01 -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; s=sasl; bh=6G+QAZDQbxfWTBlrH/xuDjMtQY0=; b=VEloz2 hF4om/BoL87DpY5sjDP5fMkdEs0V+t5jYWM0vlk1QEI6prRVx1ZzHgyq9+jUnwoV +sQPTIRykxTfN5xaqrwifK3/qFkRl66TNs9dsApSwPdOgikIUQ3hZvDvA+UORSzL qJk5Yeo4ug8vChNAm1+wovKj/YFzSWoqBGBgc= 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; q=dns; s=sasl; b=J+XTyIGNfY2BZWOe7urWH2nNS8m182Oa pVG3ONXjIy9JENHlqqPKSMPjiP1mOXJCCiaBv767baOwcEa0UNEHwZYBDZ6K/NOo fpKCj4e4zJvo4VpzHrW19c7oICZaes3DmYrxE2ZnsJbrnmtiH06YR7cmzj26a41H jZ63/Pe0dlI= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 442CE73032; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 12:28:01 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 600087302F; Mon, 26 Aug 2019 12:27:58 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Masaya Suzuki , Git Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] credential: add nocache option to the credentials API References: <20190707055132.103736-1-masayasuzuki@google.com> <20190709125620.GA18175@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20190722210037.GA31664@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 09:27:56 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20190722210037.GA31664@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Mon, 22 Jul 2019 17:00:38 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 771762E2-C81E-11E9-B60C-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > I was thinking that Git itself could treat "ttl=0" specially, the same > as your nocache, and avoid passing it along to any helpers during the > approve stage. That would make it exactly equivalent to your patch > (modulo the name change). > ... > And as you noted above, if we don't suppress the helper calls inside > Git, then every matching storage helper needs to learn about "nocache" > (or "ttl") before it will do any good. I was waiting for this discussion to settle and then the discussion seems to have petered out. Any interest to following the "ttl with special casing value 0 as 'nocache'" idea thru from either two of you, or should I take the patch as is in the meantime? Thanks.