Hi Stefan, On Thu, 29 Mar 2018, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Thu, Mar 29, 2018 at 8:18 AM, Johannes Schindelin > <johannes.schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > So what is the argument against this extra care to detect comments? Well, if > > you have something like this: > > > > [section] > > ; Here we comment about the variable called snarf > > snarf = froop > > > > and we run `git config --unset section.snarf`, we end up with this config: > > > > [section] > > ; Here we comment about the variable called snarf > > > > which obviously does not make sense. However, that is already established > > behavior for quite a few years, and I do not even try to think of a way how > > this could be solved. > > By commenting out the key/value pair instead of deleting it. > It's called --unset, not --delete ;) That would open the door to new bug reports when a user starts with this concocted config: [section] # This is a comment about the `key` setting key = value and then does this: git config --unset section.key git config section.key value git config --unset section.key git config section.key value git config --unset section.key git config section.key value and then ends up with a config like this: [section] # This is a comment about the `key` setting ;key = value ;key = value ;key = value key = value And note that the comment might be about `value` instead, so reusing a commented-out `key` setting won't fly, either. I *did* give this problem a couple of minutes of thought before writing my assessment that is quoted above ;-) Ciao, Dscho
