Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón <carenas@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> +of `sendemail.smtpPassCmd`), then a password is obtained using >> +'git-credential'. > > this last part on git credential is just undocumented, since it is already > doing so since 4d31a44a08 (git-send-email: use git credential to obtain > password, 2013-02-12) > > and of course, assuming you use a credential helper that keeps the password > encrypted you could use that instead of this new feature. Up to this point I understand your response. Documenting that "git send-email" can use "git credential" for its password store, if it is not already documented, is of course a good change. But I am not sure why this is "a good alternative". Having more choices that do not offer anything substantially different is a bad thing. Is this "new mechanism" better in what way? Simpler to use? Faster? Less error prone? Something else? Thanks. > having said that, this looks like a good alternative, but might need to > make sure if die makes sense below or would be better to see if you can > still get a password through git credential even if that fails. > > maybe the rule of what to do might even need some configuration itself. > > Carlo
