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=-3.8 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 F391B1F9FD for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 01:58:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229713AbhBPB5h (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Feb 2021 20:57:37 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:60580 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229617AbhBPB5g (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Feb 2021 20:57:36 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77D86110E18; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 20:56:54 -0500 (EST) (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=scjHNszrjyFJHKwyKobvLQqhGQ8=; b=XocOFj o65+opmX9vWkX/y08abxz+1b69A8Ts99MWaR14BLcI8HsuRQeV28qUVyDzbcrkxq d2xdqVcZCE8UpqfXFbO/XxfWD2H7hTkYBM7g+Nmv9UERmcnKfBVEGNehYHWd2IeG g7G/GiwA2jXB5KJV3dGsH5e9dKrNDRITTe1Zw= 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=r9E4FHx3QctMWExo3qdLT8akmOVgashK tpZygx4gI0xU31/VD5JoeuXdZUxnCkwiALpK6qGn+EXxFHC/T+hjsRllBXG+j+kH 3G7Kh+gdxAUJ93TdICtmaBly3uQd0wruXbSNQjk3yaubmGLQyqrdS6bAUdJ5WXJl H43wimhGe04= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72526110E16; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 20:56:54 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.243.138.161]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BB61D110E15; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 20:56:51 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Blake Burkhart , git Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fsck: make symlinked .gitignore and .gitattributes a warning References: <87y2foaltl.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 17:56:50 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Jeff King's message of "Mon, 15 Feb 2021 20:16:00 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 3CD1EA8C-6FFA-11EB-BE7F-D609E328BF65-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > That said, they'd probably want to checkout those old commits, too. So > we probably do need a config override, even if it's a broad one ("trust > me, this repo is OK, just allow symlinks for these special files"). Is this about the check that is overly strict for some existing projects that kept the jk/symlinked-dotgitx-files topic in the 'seen' so far? On the fsck end, we know we can demote the error level per repository, but I wonder if we should make checkout/clone honor the same setting? I think GITMODULES_SYMLINK has been there for quite some time at "error" level and we do want to discourage it to be a symbolic link, so I am not quite sure what the demoting of these two achieves. Why aren't we having a similar issue on .gitmodules that is a symbolic link? Thanks.