From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Bug? git submodule add SSL certificate problem: unable to get local issuer certificate Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2015 09:22:59 -0400 Message-ID: <20150321132259.GA11843@peff.net> References: <27F61CEE-F1D3-4B7F-B394-8D06A4AD8976@aschemann.net> <20150309074339.GA31866@peff.net> <54FEB1CA.7020204@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Aschemann Gerd , Jonathan Nieder , Heiko Voigt , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jens Lehmann X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Mar 21 14:23:16 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YZJMu-00034G-3N for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 14:23:12 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751332AbbCUNXF (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Mar 2015 09:23:05 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:36441 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751237AbbCUNXD (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Mar 2015 09:23:03 -0400 Received: (qmail 12504 invoked by uid 102); 21 Mar 2015 13:23:02 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.1) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 08:23:02 -0500 Received: (qmail 1374 invoked by uid 107); 21 Mar 2015 13:23:15 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 09:23:15 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 21 Mar 2015 09:22:59 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <54FEB1CA.7020204@web.de> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Mar 10, 2015 at 09:56:42PM +1300, Jens Lehmann wrote: > >Config like this is in a funny boat. We do not want it to cross > >transport boundaries, so that if we run: > > > > git -c foo=bar clone /some/local/path > > > >the process serving /some/local/path should not see the "foo" option[1]. > >But for submodules in the same repository, keeping the shared config is > >probably more reasonable (I can imagine a config variable that you might > >want to behave differently between the submodule and the main project, > >but I could not think of any off-hand, and I expect it would be a rare > >exception). > > > >Submodule folks (cc'd) may have opinions. > > I tend to rather not share configs. While I agree that for the example > which started this it would be correct to simply pass http.sslverify, > that doesn't always make sense (e.g. it never does for a setting like > core.worktree). > > We already have two options for submodule add and update that are > passed to the clone command (--reference & --depth), maybe it is time > to add another one for passing config options to clone (which then get > set permanently in the submodule's config). Sorry, I missed this earlier, as it fell into a spam trap. What you're proposing does make sense to me. We already have "git clone -c", so I think it would just be a matter of passing along that option in the submodule code. -Peff