Re: [PATCH] http-push: don't always prompt for password
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:52:23
On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 09:48:17AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Stefan Naewe [off-list ref] writes:quoted
http-push prompts for a password when the URL is set as 'https://user@host/repo' even though there is one set in ~/.netrc. Pressing ENTER at the password prompt succeeds then, but is a annoying and makes it almost useless in a shell script, e.g. Signed-off-by: Stefan Naewe <redacted> ---Thanks. With this the only callsite of init_curl_http_auth() becomes the one after we get the 401 response, and this caller makes sure that user_name is not NULL. Do we still want "if (user_name)" inside init_curl_http_auth()?
Since we now only call init_curl_http_auth when we know we need auth, I
think it would make more sense to just move the user_name asking there,
too, like:
static void init_curl_http_auth(CURL *result)
{
struct strbuf up = STRBUF_INIT;
if (!user_name)
user_name = xstrdup(git_getpass_with_description("Username", description);
if (!user_pass)
user_pass = xstrdup(git_getpass_with_description("Password", description);
strbuf_addf(&up, "%s:%s", user_name, user_pass);
curl_easy_setopt(result, CURLOPT_USERPWD, strbuf_detach(&up, NULL));
}
And then it's easy to swap out the asking for credential_fill() when it
becomes available. But I admit I don't care that much now, as I'll just
end up doing that refactoring later with my credential patches anyway.
I tried to rewrite the proposed commit log message to describe the real issue, and here is what I came up with:
Your description looks accurate to me.
What is somewhat troubling is that after analyzing the root cause of the issue, I am wondering if a more correct fix is to remove the user@ part from the URL (in other words, document that a URL with an embedded username will ask for password upfront, and tell the users that if they have netrc entries or if they are accessing a resource that does not require authentication, they should omit the username from the URL).
It's tempting, because the non-netrc case is the common one, and we are dropping the round-trip avoidance for those people. I'm just not sure that it's going to be obvious to users that they need to drop the user@ portion from their URL when using netrc. That seems like a bizarre requirement from the user's POV, even if we do document it. -Peff