On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 10:40 PM, Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 08:03:41PM -0800, Jacob Keller wrote: > >> I do find it a bit weird that --global writes to one of either file, >> and doesn't read from both. I'd rather have --global "only" be >> .gitconfig, and instead add a new option for handling XDG file, and >> then have it such that it reads them in system -> xdg -> >> home/.gitconfig -> local, which allows for local .gitconfig to >> override XDG config, but logically treat them just like we do any >> other files. > > I find it weird, too, but I'm not sure that's the right direction. It > means that users have to start caring about using "--xdg" instead of > "--global" if that's what they want to write to. The original idea was > that the transition to xdg should be fairly seamless, and that --global > would be an abstraction over both. > > To complete that abstraction it seems like reading via "--global" should > read from both (in the same precedence order that normal config lookup > uses). If you only use one, there wouldn't be any change in behavior. > And if you use both, then the behavior makes sense as a subset of the > normal config lookup. I.e., it could even be explained as: > > If you give no "source", normal config lookup is similar to checking > "--system", then "--global", then "--local". > > The only person who might be affected is somebody who carries both files > _and_ really wanted "--global" to read from one specific file (though I > have no idea from which without looking at the source, and from reading > this thread it seems I am not the only one who would be confused). So > I'd be OK calling that an unintended and unsupported behavior, and the > right thing all along should have been to use "--file=" if you really > want to avoid "--global" automagic. > > -Peff I think this end game is fine with me too, it's definitely better than what we have now. Thanks, Jake
