Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH 3/3] clone: auto-enable git-credential-store when necessary

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 05:17:20PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

> > There are more cases beyond that, too. You might have a helper defined
> > which doesn't actually store passwords, but just sometimes tries to
> > provide one. My thinking was that if you're clueful enough to have
> > configured helpers, you can probably deal with the fallout. But you're
> > right that it may still be a regression in the sense that the user may
> > still have to actually _do_ something to get their fetch to work.
> >
> > I guess a more robust version of this is that _after_ the successful
> > clone, we could ask the credential system "hey, do you have the
> > credential for $URL?". And if it can't answer, then we can take action
> > (whether that action is setting up credential-store and seeding it with
> > the password, or just advising the user about the situation).
> >
> > -Peff
> Yeah I don't mean deal with some there-but-broken helper, but this:
>     /usr/share/doc/git/contrib/credential/gnome-keyring/git-credential-gnome-keyring:
>     not found
> Until then the observable effect of that has been to make the
> credential.helper config a noop, but now it's causing "we have a helper"
> behavior.

Right, I understood. The other case I mean is not one that's broken, but
a helper that's designed to provide a password from a read-only store
(which presumably doesn't have _this_ password, else why would they be
providing it in the URL?).

It is not going to help that the clone will feed the password to such a
helper because it will (correctly, and by design) ignore any "store"

In other words, I am agreeing with you and indicating that there are
even more cases where a non-empty helper config will mislead us.

I'm going to try to re-work the patch to do this check-at-the-end
technique, and probably try to make the UI for clearing and seeding
passwords a bit more friendly, too.