Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> submodule: pass on http.extraheader config settings > > IMHO this should come on top of jk/submodule-config-sanitize-fix (I was > surprised at first that your test worked at all, but that is because it > is using "clone", which is the one code path that works). Yes. > But I think we are waiting on going one of two paths: > > 1. drop sanitizing entirely > > 2. fix sanitizing and add more variables to it > > If we go the route of (2), then we'd want my fix topic and this patch. > And if not, then we don't need any of it (just a patch dropping the > filtering, which AFAIK nobody has written yet). Doubly yes. That is why I didn't pick up 2/2 in the previous round and also jk/submodule-config-sanitize-fix is not in 'next' for the same reason. I agree with you that we have not yet reached concensus on which one of the two we would want to take. I was sort of surprised to see 2/2 sent again, after seeing that Dscho sounded strongly in favor of not filtering the passed configuration variables, which would make the patch unnecessary. -- 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