From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] echo usernames as they are typed Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 13:59:56 -0500 Message-ID: <20111128185956.GA28191@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20111124105801.GA6168@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20111127082744.GA32068@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20111128035321.GA15640@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20111128113127.GA23408@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Erik Faye-Lund X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Nov 28 20:00:21 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RV6RA-0006jF-HF for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:00:20 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753892Ab1K1S77 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Nov 2011 13:59:59 -0500 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:54117 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752843Ab1K1S76 (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Nov 2011 13:59:58 -0500 Received: (qmail 26202 invoked by uid 107); 28 Nov 2011 19:06:32 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Mon, 28 Nov 2011 14:06:31 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 28 Nov 2011 13:59:56 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 01:59:34PM +0100, Erik Faye-Lund wrote: > > Certainly on non-Windows something like that would not be welcome. The > > user can already have specified GIT_ASKPASS if they don't have a > > terminal. And once the credential-helper code is in, they can use a > > platform-specific helper that provides a nice dialog if they want it. > > > > Yes, that's certainly cleaner implementation-wise. But didn't you > change it to only do the storage-part in the last round, or did I > misunderstand the updated series? Yeah, sorry, I'm getting ahead of myself. I left room in the spec for an "ask" operation on helpers, but I haven't implemented it yet. -Peff