"brian m. carlson" <sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > 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). Thanks. I think the configuration should live inside http.* namespace, as there are already things like http[.<url>].sslCert and friends. I do not have a good suggestion on the name of the leaf-level variable. ForceAuth sounds as if you are forcing authentication even when the other side does not require it, though. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html