On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 8:59 AM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >> This triggers two reactions for me: >> >> (a) We should totally do that. > >> (b) It's a rabbit hole to go down. > > And yes, I had both of those reactions, too. We've had the > "project-level .gitconfig" discussion many times over the years. And it > generally comes back to "you can ship a snippet of config and then give > people a script which adds it to their repo". I see this "project-level .gitconfig" via the .gitmodules file. See GITMODULES(5), anything except submodule.<name>.path is just project-level .gitconfig, so in that sense we already threw out the baby with the bathwater. I think we want to be extra careful to not add more possible options into the .gitmodules file, now that we established a strong stance on not shipping a project-level .gitconfig. Thanks, Stefan
