On Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 01:32:01AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > > But I think we would happily eat a line like: > > > > [HTTP/2] [] [Secret: xyz] > > > > even lacking a stream identifier. I think that's reasonably OK in > > practice, because we're being over-eager in redacting instead of the > > other way around. And we're unlikely to see such a line from curl > > anyway, so I don't think that it matters. > > Yes, you're correct that we'd allow an empty stream identifier. I'm > content to leave it in the name of simplicity. Yeah, I am definitely OK with that as well. I don't think it's worth being overly specific in what we accept for redaction, since we're erring on the side of being less restrictive. > > But this may all be moot anyway, I don't feel strongly one way or the > > other. > > My inclination is to leave it. I was actually tempted to just allow > _anything_ in the brackets if only because it makes the code even > simpler, but the "skip past digits" seemed like a reasonable middle > ground. Yep, same. Thanks for the sanity check :-). Thanks, Taylor
