On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 01:24:06PM -0700, Kyle J. McKay wrote:
I am not yet convinced that the precedence rule specified in this
what we want (I do not have an example why it is *not* what we want,
either). Another definition could be if user@ is present in the
request, give lower precedence
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 05:56:44AM -0700, Kyle J. McKay wrote:
+ matches a url if it refers to the same scheme, host and port and the
+ path portion is an exact match or a prefix that matches at a /
+ boundary. If url does not include a user name, it will match a url
+ with
Jeff King p...@peff.net writes:
1. The explanation and special-casing of username is a little
complicated to explain.
2. The behavior for resolving the value when faced with multiple
possibilities is completely unlike the rest of the config system
(both dropping
Previously the url had to specify an exactly matching user name
and password if those were present in the url being matched against.
Now the password portion is always ignored and omitting the user
name from url allows it to match against any user name.
Signed-off-by: Kyle J. McKay
Kyle J. McKay mack...@gmail.com writes:
Previously the url had to specify an exactly matching user name
and password if those were present in the url being matched against.
Now the password portion is always ignored and omitting the user
name from url allows it to match against any user
On Jul 22, 2013, at 11:00, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Kyle J. McKay mack...@gmail.com writes:
diff --git a/Documentation/config.txt b/Documentation/config.txt
index e461f32..c418adf 100644
--- a/Documentation/config.txt
+++ b/Documentation/config.txt
@@ -1517,15 +1517,26 @@ http.url.*::
Any of the
Kyle J. McKay mack...@gmail.com writes:
A solid wall of text is somewhat hard to read, so I'd queue the
equivalent of the following git diff -w output on top.
Can I send out the change as a 'fixup!' patch? Or do I need to send a
new v9 patch series with the documentation update?
If you are
On Jul 22, 2013, at 14:51, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Kyle J. McKay mack...@gmail.com writes:
A solid wall of text is somewhat hard to read, so I'd queue the
equivalent of the following git diff -w output on top.
Can I send out the change as a 'fixup!' patch? Or do I need to
send a
new v9
Kyle J. McKay mack...@gmail.com writes:
After replacing take with takes in the change I'm good with just
squashing that diff in.
Thanks for proofreading. Then let's omit an extra back-and-forth.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe git in
the body of a message to
9 matches
Mail list logo
