Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Dennis Kaarsemaker <dennis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> On Tue, 2016-10-11 at 22:48 +0300, Mantas Mikulėnas wrote: >>> On 2016-10-11 22:36, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> > Thanks for a review. I'll wait until one of (1) a squashable patch >>> > to address the "we do not want unconditional overwrite" issue, (2) a >>> > reroll from Mantas to do the same, or (3) a counter-argument from >>> > somebody to explain why unconditional overwrite is a good idea here >>> > (but not in the original) appears. >>> >>> >>> I overlooked that. I can write a patch, but it shouldn't make any >>> difference in practice – if c->username *was* set, then it would also >>> get added to the search attribute list, therefore the search couldn't >>> possibly return any results with a different username anyway. >> >> Makes sense, so a (3) it is. > > So... does it mean the gnome-keyring one needs a bugfix? Just so there is no misunderstanding, updating (or not) gnome-keyring code is an unrelated issue. I'll queue the patch under discussion in this thread, and if an update to gnome-keyring appears, that will be queued separately. Thanks again, both of you.