From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/2] Add support for sending additional HTTP headers Date: Wed, 4 May 2016 03:45:59 -0400 Message-ID: <20160504074559.GA3077@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20160504062618.GA9849@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed May 04 09:46:09 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1axrVX-0000w9-Vq for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 04 May 2016 09:46:08 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756934AbcEDHqD (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 May 2016 03:46:03 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:33724 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751256AbcEDHqD (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 May 2016 03:46:03 -0400 Received: (qmail 27314 invoked by uid 102); 4 May 2016 07:46:02 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 04 May 2016 03:46:02 -0400 Received: (qmail 7693 invoked by uid 107); 4 May 2016 07:46:13 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 04 May 2016 03:46:13 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 04 May 2016 03:45:59 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160504062618.GA9849@sigill.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 02:26:18AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > submodule: pass on http.extraheader config settings > > IMHO this should come on top of jk/submodule-config-sanitize-fix (I was > surprised at first that your test worked at all, but that is because it > is using "clone", which is the one code path that works). > > But I think we are waiting on going one of two paths: > > 1. drop sanitizing entirely > > 2. fix sanitizing and add more variables to it > > If we go the route of (2), then we'd want my fix topic and this patch. > And if not, then we don't need any of it (just a patch dropping the > filtering, which AFAIK nobody has written yet). Actually, I think this last bit is not quite true. If we want to go back to "nothing gets passed to submodules", we can drop all of my patches, but I don't think anybody wants to do that. But if we want "everything gets passed to submodules", then we do need something like my patch series, because every use of local_repo_env needs to be come "local_repo_env excluding GIT_CONFIG_PARAMETERS". I don't think we want to simply drop that variable from local_repo_env (which would also mean that it would be propagated to a local git-upload-pack, for example, along with any third-party scripts that use rev-parse --local-env-vars). So I think we'd actually want my series as a preliminary fix, followed by dropping the whitelist entirely on top of that, and then probably simplifying the shell sanitize_submodule_env() on top of that (it would be correct without the whitelist, but you can also trivially implement it without having to call submodule--helper at all). -Peff