Hi, On Sun, 26 Jul 2009, Alex Vandiver wrote: > At Sun Jul 26 12:49:28 -0400 2009, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > Is there any downside in allowing this? > > Not explicitly. However, there are no legal current uses of it, and > allowing it might encourage extensions to use the top-level config > namespace. So? > It also has the odd property that it _must_ be at the top of a > configuration file -- unlike all other configuration options, you can > never return to the section to add more variable definitions later. Yes, that is a special property that you might actually want in some contexts. That, together with the fact that "git config -f <file>" was meant _explicitely_ to allow 3rd party porcelains having their own config files without having to implement their own "git config" lets me suspect that we'd rather want the current behavior. Ciao, Dscho -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html