Leah Neukirchen <leah@xxxxxxxx> writes: > NO_COLOR (http://no-color.org/) is a comprehensive approach to disable > colors by default for all tools: The list of software that supports that "convention" is, eh, respectable. Is it really a "convention" yet, or yet another thing the user needs to worry about? > diff --git a/color.c b/color.c > index d48dd947c..59e9c2459 100644 > --- a/color.c > +++ b/color.c > @@ -326,6 +326,8 @@ int git_config_colorbool(const char *var, const char *value) > > static int check_auto_color(void) > { > + if (getenv("NO_COLOR")) > + return 0; Our convention often calls for CONFIG_VAR=false to mean "I do not want to see what CONFIG_VAR wants to do done", i.e. NO_COLOR=false git show would show colored output if there is no other settings. But this code contradicts the convention, deliberately because that is what no-color.org wants. Makes me wonder if that convention is worth following in the first place. > if (color_stdout_is_tty < 0) > color_stdout_is_tty = isatty(1); > if (color_stdout_is_tty || (pager_in_use() && pager_use_color)) { According to no-color.org's FAQ #2, NO_COLOR should affect only the "default" behaviour, and should stay back if there is an explicit end-user configuration (or command line override). And this helper function is called only from want_color() when their is no such higher precedence setting, which is in line with the recommendation. Which is good.
