Re: Handling of paths

[Charles Bailey <charles@hashpling.org>]

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 12:42:40PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Victor Toni <victor.toni@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > What's unexpected is that paths used for sslKey or sslCert are treated
> > differently insofar as they are expected to be absolute.
> > Relative paths (whether with or without "~") don't work.
> 
> It appears that only two of these among four were made aware of the
> "~[username]/" prefix in bf9acba2 ("http: treat config options
> sslCAPath and sslCAInfo as paths", 2015-11-23), but "sslkey" and
> "sslcert" were still left as plain vanilla strings.  I do not know
> if that was an elaborate omission, or a mere oversight, as it seems
> that it happened while I was away, so...

It was more of an oversight than a deliberate omission, but more
accurately I didn't actively consider whether the other http.ssl*
variables were pathname-like or not.

At the time I was trying to make a config which needed to set
http.sslCAPath and/or http.sslCAInfo more portable between users and
these were "obviously" pathname-like to me. Now that I read
the help for http.sslCert and http.sslKey, I see no reason that they
shouldn't also use git_config_pathname. If I'd been more thorough I
would have proposed this at the time.

Charles.