On 15/7/25 18:09, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 11:46:31AM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 15/7/25 11:29, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
From: matoro
Should we use here?
I generally don't like to change the git metadata that a user
submits with unless it is clearly
On Tue, Jul 15, 2025 at 11:46:31AM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
> On 15/7/25 11:29, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> > From: matoro
>
> Should we use here?
I generally don't like to change the git metadata that a user
submits with unless it is clearly broken, which I don't think
is the case
On 15/7/25 11:29, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
From: matoro
Should we use here?
The existing implementation assumes that client/server certificates are
single individual certificates. If using publicly-issued certificates,
or internal CAs that use an intermediate issuer, this is unlikely to
From: matoro
The existing implementation assumes that client/server certificates are
single individual certificates. If using publicly-issued certificates,
or internal CAs that use an intermediate issuer, this is unlikely to be
the case, and they will instead be certificate chains. While this c
