Denton Liu <[email protected]> writes:
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 12:21:05PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> And the "story" is not "If you have remote.$name.url and want to
>> move its value to remote.$name.pushurl while setting the former to a
>> new value, then..." I want to know why the user gets in such a
>> situation in the first place.
> ...
> The following is the story that led to me writing the feature in the
> first place:
> ...
OK, so in essense, it is quite similar to the following,
>> .... Perhaps you originally had a R/W URL that always
>> require authentication, but now you want to use an anonymous R/O URL
>> for your fetch traffic without having to authenticate? If there is
>> a model situation to make all of these four hold, perhaps it can be
>> added somewhere to help users who would find the new feature useful
>> discover it.
i.e.
You may have started your interaction with the repository
with a single authenticated URL that can be used for both
fetching and pushing, but over time you may have become sick
of having to authenticate only to fetch. In such a case,
you can feed an unauthenticated/anonymous fetch URL to
set-url with this option, so that the authenticated URL that
you have been using for pushing becomes the pushURL, and the
new, unauthenticated/anonymous URL will be used for
fetching.
With something like that in the documentation, I think the users
won't be puzzled by a feature that is seemingly a bit too niche, I
would think.
Thanks.
