On 8/17/19 4:43 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >> >> I realize we'd have to tell people how to rename the account to support >> upgrades -- but is there some other reason to keep the shared "git" name? > > The argument I've been told is that users expect 'git@...' to work > as remote URI on their boxes. They don't want users to bind the URI to > specific implementation. >
It's not really a URI... it's a username on a remote machine. And these "users" are programmers =P But, I can understand not wanting to tell a bunch of strangers to edit all of their ~/.git/config files at this point. Instead of configuring both packages to use different users, could we configure them to share a working directory? If we give the "git" user a home directory of /var/lib/git [0], then as far as I can tell, both gitolite and gitea will be happy with that. They use different configuration file names and repository locations, and wouldn't need to block each other. [0] This doesn't violate the guidelines that I posted since real humans log in as this account to clone repos out of $HOME. Moreover, I don't think that either gitolite or gitea references this path itself -- it really belongs to the user.
