On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 01:33:31PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Look at how "Fetching branches from other repositories" is done. It > shows the use of "remote add" and then shows the result by running > "cat" to show the contents. > > I think that organization is much nicer than completely hiding how > the result looks like behind another "git config --set" call, like > the latter half of this patch does. I think for new users, `git config …`'s opacity may a good thing. Who cares how Git stores the config values? Only users who like to edit the config files by hand (like, um, me ;). For someone trying to wrap their head around Git for the first time, the fact that you can read and set config values which are stored somewhere should be enough. I don't feel strongly enough in favor of `git config` to push on this though, so I'd be happy dropping this patch in favor of: > The resulting text may read like so: > … I'm fine with this too, but if this is the suggested route, why bother with `git config` at all? Is it just for ease of scripting? Cheers, Trevor -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature