Max Gautier <mg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > But yeah, "per-directory customization" isn't good, it multiplies the > place to look when the config is not correct. I was mentioning by fear > that using only one file would be hard to manage is there is too much > patterns. Understood. My primary point is that we are not using too many patterns currently, and hence many files are *not* covered by .editorconfig rules. Some files may not even be meant to be edited by an editor, but many others are allowed to be edited without enforcing any style with .editorconfig and how to format them is up to the developers. Applying a default rule to these files to enforce consistency may be better than uncontrolled random mess each developer may leave without any rules, and at the same time, doing so would mean we do not have keep adding to the "C uses this rule, Shell uses this rule, oh, now we also want Makefile to use this use" enumeration. There may be fallouts (i.e., "For files of type X that currently are not governed by .editorconfig, the indent-with-tab rule is not suitable, but suddenly these files are subject to the default rule") but adjusting the rules with exception would be more explicit and clarify the rules.
