From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 923A71FBB0 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 17:10:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755213AbcKVRKN (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:10:13 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:53677 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752159AbcKVRKM (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:10:12 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3329F4F182; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:10:11 -0500 (EST) 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=+t4otdVKMVn7gdkoFQm/FSnKsxs=; b=jpu3SR PRGr0NecklBQ4+eYwmTAV/PHm81ErTmCHh6kXLm3s+NITtqQPcRQaj/PJ+y3pG0k kNXa47JJQn/DRmg7zlxcMsU5VAPcSuqtEMV+rrLq2F9ncx1/tT/3549FlkHaUvd2 zWyYh/0rMeoMdJkOZKYi37xIe4YZ9LjrNpuX8= 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=gDh36M3Dw79/RNYQtB0NK2kr79gsKJ/j VOZC05XCufMC9TWHcic01IXgUQdrw67ZkxI+QrQLxxewO3GzUczYOcDdFPi/NyIm 9FeTgtMObDjpVOBXyQ/qWtZk/r/RwgkiB/y2T9wteakvMEP/sPJMVUR7c+AwFyux vTn/MBy5GmM= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28A584F181; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:10:11 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5CF364F180; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:10:10 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: Duy Nguyen , Git Mailing List , Ralf Thielow , Taufiq Hoven Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] stripspace: respect repository config References: <5567548295222401fab10d3f2901c1787afbfd07.1479737858.git.johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 09:10:08 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Johannes Schindelin's message of "Tue, 22 Nov 2016 17:13:59 +0100 (CET)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 864ECD16-B0D6-11E6-9E40-3AB77A1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: >> This conditional config file reading is a trap for similar bugs to >> happen again. Is there any reason we should not just mark the command >> RUN_SETUP_GENTLY in git.c and call git_config() here unconditionally? > > As I plan to slip these patches into Git for Windows v2.11.0, i.e. making > this a last-minute hot fix, I want to err on the side of caution. So do I. As a hot-fix, I'd prefer the patch I queued yesterday. I think we want to audit the ones without RUN_SETUP* in the command table in order to hunt for regression aka "a fix revealed a bug that was covered by .git/config accidentally getting read when run from the top-level of the working tree", though. We may find unreported breakages that we may have to fix.