On Fri, Feb 05, 2016 at 01:02:58PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Hmph, so documenting that <emptyname>:<emptypassword>@<repository> > as a supported way might be an ugly-looking solution to the original > problem. A less ugly-looking solution might be a boolean that can > be set per URL (we already have urlmatch-config infrastructure to > help us do so) to tell us to pass the empty credential to lubCurl, > bypassing the step to ask the user for password that we do not use. > > The end-result of either of these solution would strictly be better > than the patch we discussed in that the end user will not have to > interact with the prompt at all, right?
Yes, that's true. I'll try to come up with a patch this weekend that implements that (maybe remote.forceAuth = true or somesuch). -- brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US +1 832 623 2791 | https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b: 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
