4 ms·

This can cause problems in repositories with CODEOWNERS files, at the very minimum the change should be notified.

• OJFord 3y ago
  If old guy has (or creates without noticing the name change) a (possibly private!) repo called 'test', and then new user creates one with the same name, when old guy pushes... I assume they think their checking for emptiness and inactivity covers these cases to some reasonable likelihood.
  • bastawhiz 3y ago
    Nothing will happen when the old guy pushes because the SSH key was changed.
    • OJFord 3y ago
      Well, or was it? Unclear to me why they did that in TFA - if they just changed the name, keeping same SSH key on that one (now under a new name) would be fine, helpful even. We don't know if it was changed/removed on the old name (just assume/hope so).
      • bastawhiz 3y ago
        The post opens with the author describing how his key wouldn't work. But moreover, his account was renamed. Git has no knowledge of usernames. If the old key was kept on the account that was renamed, it wouldn't have given anyone access to anything new.
        • OJFord 3y ago
          I didn't say git did anything with GitHub usernames. Yes it would, OP would hypothetically push to old user/org not realising their namespace had changed, but the key would check out, and potentially what was private would now be public. But anyway, it was a hypothetical, and relatively unlikely, since for real damage (what should be private being public) you'd need to know or be misfortunate/lucky in happening to use exactly the right (or wrong) repo name anyway. And as I said hopefully/I assume they do wipe remove the key anyway.