Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón <carenas@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> Sorry, but isn't that what happend already in the previous step? >> What are you ordering the codebase (after applying the previous >> stpe) do further? It already is "using it to notify the user when >> username and/or password is missing". > > not sure I follow, but the current code (as well as the one after patch 1) > just silently ignores any credential that was missing username and password > since the _gently version of the call will only really fail for a missing > protocol. Ah, I misread the intention of [1/1]. While I was rewriting the if/else structure inside the loop, somehow I thought that we want to warn when from_url_gently() fails or user/pass are missing, and in this step, we are adding to the "warning-worthy" set an entry that does not have either host or path. Sorry about the confusion.
