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=-5.5 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 2641C2021E for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 22:58:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754752AbcKIW6l (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Nov 2016 17:58:41 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:52222 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751919AbcKIW6k (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Nov 2016 17:58:40 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38E474E4E4; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 17:58:39 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=sasl; bh=Bce44VKTRwTW4bMmpRISkxlYaqY=; b=mewEX7Ktj/GcxMONj9Ey B07YplUj6go0qHlb2vQPfjJG8oof9WQjUjaWIfZv7u1FTxVCSW4EYqg/jM3BYlN7 hhqYLgHNY1yB7ev45WMHiZCTz9RZ/NvZ/fmJBLthz/PGrSSnM77HBTYt2YgVl3zm qlFcPyExQb7wIeZNazXGFgo= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=JfjPJFOC4ipmqTQhwjDX70gbrgFmPRvjEHZrZEP22WeYKg gll6es+3OXO2Hfsb2zKCL9xYw7qWMum09yVKMDbcwL9b0eVI7poytFKJO1499tyR CrcPpiiQbQTnvL7OCk8Yi24IT3DhBACF17b0wi8EaMBJeJhj1XLP15AKg/oC4= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3059E4E4E3; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 17:58:39 -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-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9CB9C4E4E0; Wed, 9 Nov 2016 17:58:38 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Duy Nguyen Cc: Jeff King , Git Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] attr: do not respect symlinks for in-tree .gitattributes References: <20161102130432.d3zprdul4sqgcfwu@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20161102130848.qpigt4hxpoyfjf7x@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20161107211010.xo3243egggdgscou@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20161107211522.vzl4zpsu5cpembgc@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2016 14:58:37 -0800 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: 0D38BDB6-A6D0-11E6-97ED-987C12518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Duy Nguyen writes: > Let's err on the safe side and disable symlinks to outside repo by > default (or even all symlinks on .gitattributes and .gitignore as the > first step) > > What I learned from my changes in .gitignore is, if we have not > forbidden something, people likely find some creative use for it. Yup. Supporting any symlink in-tree is like requiring Git to be used only on symlink-capable filesystems. Not allowing it sounds like a very sensible option and unlike true contents, there is no downside to give that limitation to things like .git. Shouldn't we do the same for .gitmodules while we are at it?