On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> I think it's arguable whether "--global" should behave the same.
>
> I know you know this and I am writing this message for others.
>
> I admit that I wondered if "a single file" ought to cover these
> short-hand notations like --global and --local while re-reading the
> log message of 9b25a0b52 (config: add include directive,
> 2012-02-06). In other words, I agree that it used to be arguable
> before we released v1.7.10.
>
> It no longer is arguable simply due to backward compatibilty. The
> ship has long sailed.
I don't have any strong opinion, but FWIW, the use case I have for this
is as follows: I sync my ~/.gitconfig between my own machine and a work
machine. On the work machine though, I like people to have work emails,
and I wrote some scripts that verify that. For my case, I added an
include of a ~/.gitconfig.more which is not synced, and has values that
override the ones in ~/.gitconfig. Since I'm the one who also wrote
that script, I just added an "--includes" to the check so it won't barf
on my setup, but had it not been my script I'd be stuck.
This is all a "FWIW" -- in case anyone thinks about use cases for a
possible (future) change of the default.
--
((x=>x(x))(x=>x(x))) Eli Barzilay:
http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life!