Re: [PATCH] archive: re-allow HEAD:Documentation on a remote invocation

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 07:03:36PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > I see it the opposite way. People are clearly using the "$ref:$path"
> > syntax. So why would we restrict them from doing so? There are no
> > security implications (i.e., they could always just grab $ref and
> > extract $path themselves). In my view, ee27ca4a was over-eager in its
> > restrictions because I wanted it to be simple and close the hole. Now we
> > can take our time adding more code to loosen it.
> 
> Ok, so it is more like a partial revert of whatever we did. In that case,
> I'd take CMN's patch to limit the extent of the changes, as it more
> closely matches the spirit of the original ee27ca4 (archive: don't let
> remote clients get unreachable commits, 2011-11-17) that singled out and
> catered to the need of "archive" command alone. It is already part of the
> v1.7.8.1 release, so I would prefer a change to be stupid and simple.

For a maint release, I am OK with that. In the long term, I'd rather my
patches go onto master (either for 1.7.9 or for later), as I think they
are the right way to do it.

-Peff