On 2021-11-07 at 23:27:24, Eric Sunshine wrote:

I've seen this come up on the mailing list a couple times recently,
though I haven't really followed along and don't use Git through an
SSH proxy, thus I did have to go do some reading to understand what
this is talking about. Perhaps people searching out this FAQ entry
will already have sufficient context to understand what this is
saying, so maybe no additional context is needed here. However, I was
wondering if it might make sense for this to give a bit of reason
explaining _why_ these tools need to be configured to not exit
immediately upon EOF. As it stands now, this solution is a black box;
it will work but people won't understand why. Perhaps that doesn't
matter since most people consulting a FAQ like this probably just want
to get the thing working and don't care about the underlying details.
Then again, if the underlying reason is made more readily apparent,
maybe this knowledge can become more widespread.

I'll try to see if I can stuff in a sentence there about why that's
necessary.  I think I understand it sufficiently well to summarize it.

"modify, tamper with, change" sounds like it came from the Department
of Redundancy Department. I like the sound of "tamper with" since the
image it conveys feels quite suitable here. Perhaps this could be
simplified to:

   The proxy cannot tamper with or buffer the...

I realize this sounds redundant, but I'm trying to avoid the situation
where people say, "I'm not _tampering_ with it, since I'm authorized to
do this by the company.  I'm just modifying it to remove this
inappropriate content/malware/data leak."  My goal here is to make it
crystal clear that if you do this, you'll break things, and provide
ammunition for people to go to their IT departments and say, "Look, your
proxy prevents me from doing my job.  The Git developers say so.  Fix
it."

I can drop one of "change" and "modify", though, since I think they're
synonyms.
-- 
brian m. carlson (he/him or they/them)
Toronto, Ontario, CA