On Fri, 2020-05-01 at 08:50 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > 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? The main reason would be "simpler to use". At the point the developer is configuring smtp, adding another line with 'command to get the password' instead of 'password' is way more intuitive than configure a credential. Best regards, Leonardo Bras
