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-Status: No, score=-4.0 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 3BCDB1F4B4 for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 22:56:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731938AbgI3W4f (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2020 18:56:35 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:64449 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731925AbgI3W4f (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2020 18:56:35 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A439D102E47; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 18:56:31 -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=Lw233MGHtKHLe67biQyq6O8WprA=; b=t3h2ZT ejdJajcwBiVfhZxmv7dodJvrdpcNCrShMhGyuPInnQLvWrAi5upQf1zgP39gxrHo natf5NUIVinQza6twdkZVUZ0MgLeSZqIsDSYyhe0TnKrvOFOU4F5Vn/rWcY5s5ud u25QfzIhc/w3EQy6114gyG5StmCrZMfjv9pgQ= 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=yUzpYzK1K78qdHEiL+OlOyqBT1sLpBIx AiI8TR5GxQJYTi5ieWz1FqNiWcrPK2hyASVPMx9Kgwqqpv9n4oelXGjWjhIyxGC5 ZddRzss7W7m++KnB42+71wPHgBAFpCqN6sKCfR40LxCGekbdv+oAoJxwNR9S+xB8 Nee48gVIK1A= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C718102E46; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 18:56:31 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.75.7.245]) (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 E15AB102E3C; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 18:56:28 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Carlo Arenas , Nikita Leonov via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin , Nikita Leonov Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] credentials: make line reading Windows compatible References: <20200929003000.GA898702@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20200929004448.GD898702@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20200929030043.GA905754@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20200930223913.GB1908000@coredump.intra.peff.net> Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 15:56:27 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200930223913.GB1908000@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Wed, 30 Sep 2020 18:39:13 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 2CE56816-0370-11EB-8280-F0EA2EB3C613-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 03:25:09PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> OK, so what's the final verdict from us? This is good enough to >> move forward as-is? > > I'd prefer to see the credential-cache--daemon changes either dropped, > or split out into a separate patch with the justification of: this > probably doesn't matter in practice, but it makes the whole protocol > between client and server treat CRLF consistently. > > I had also raised a question in: > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/20200929004220.GC898702@coredump.intra.peff.net/ > > about whether they just care about the empty line, or about CRLF on data > lines. If the former (which is what the commit message claims), then I > think we can do something much simpler. But I suspect it is the latter, > and it is simply the commit message that is a bit misleading. > > Other than those nits, I think the series is OK. Sure. But credential-store side is also iffy; it is not like they want CRLF on data lines (if they want CR in data, that needs to be encoded). The only reason I can think of that the change to "-store" makes any difference is when people edit it, but the file is not designed to be manually edited, so even that part of the series needs a better justification. It's not like "We want to be compatible" without "why it is better to be compatible" is a good rationale, when we define the file format not to be manually edited in the first place. Thanks.