>On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 1:13 PM, David Aguilar <davvid@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Will this not conflict with folks that supply their own gitconfig? > You mean people that provide their own ETC_GITCONFIG? If you mean distributions, their packaging would override /etc/gitconfig, if you mean people that have already a /etc/gitconfig, packaging systems usually save the old one so they can solve the conflict manually (e.g. /etc/gitconfig.pacsave). So no, it would not conflict. Yuck. Yes, that one. I package my own /etc/gitconfig (as we have long advertised as the "way to do it") and asking users to manually fix up thousands of machines is a bad idea. Yes, thousands. We're much past 30,000 cores at the moment. >> I like the idea. Docs? Also, should this not be done in the C side so that we don't waste time reading the config, and also prevent users from overriding these? > But we want them to be easily readable, and possibly allow distributions to easily modify them. In that case I take it back -- I dont like that approach. We want consistency, not divergence. This encourages the former. -- David -- 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