Re: [PATCH 1/1] mingw: handle absolute paths in expand_user_path()

From: Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
	Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mingw: handle absolute paths in expand_user_path()
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2018 22:36:52 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <e7ff6f22-fe5a-3cca-9305-2c8a6fb55d45@kdbg.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181107204142.GA30078@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Am 07.11.18 um 21:41 schrieb Jeff King:
> On Wed, Nov 07, 2018 at 07:52:28PM +0100, Johannes Sixt wrote:
>> Do I understand correctly, that you use a leading slash as an indicator to
>> construct a path relative to system_path(). How about a "reserved" user
>> name? For example,
>>
>>    [http] sslcert = ~system_path/what/ever
>>
>> although a more unique name, perhaps with some punctuation, may be
>> desirable.
> 
> It's syntactically a bit further afield, but something like:
> 
>    [http]
>    sslcert = $RUNTIME_PREFIX/what/ever
> 
> would make sense to me, and is a bit less subtle than the fake user. I
> don't know if that would confuse people into thinking that we
> interpolate arbitrary environment variables, though.

The expansion of a fake user name would have to go in 
expand_user_path(), a fake variable name would have to be expanded 
elsewhere. Now, Dscho mentions in the cover letter that his patch has 
already seen some field testing ("has been 'in production' for a good 
while"). So, we have gained some confidence that the point where the 
substitution happens, in expand_user_path(), is suitable. Therefore, I 
have slight preference for a fake user.

-- Hannes