>On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 1:13 PM, David Aguilar <dav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Will this not conflict with folks that supply their own gitconfig?

> You mean people that provide their own ETC_GITCONFIG? If you mean
distributions, their packaging would override /etc/gitconfig, if you
mean people that have already a /etc/gitconfig, packaging systems
usually save the old one so they can solve the conflict manually (e.g.
/etc/gitconfig.pacsave). So no, it would not conflict.

Yuck. Yes, that one. I package my own /etc/gitconfig (as we have long 
advertised as the "way to do it") and asking users to manually fix up thousands 
of machines is a bad idea. 

Yes, thousands.  We're much past 30,000 cores at the moment. 

>> I like the idea. Docs?  Also, should this not be done in the C side so that 
>> we don't waste time reading the config, and also prevent users from 
>> overriding these?

> But we want them to be easily readable, and possibly allow
distributions to easily modify them.

In that case I take it back -- I dont like that approach.  We want consistency, 
not divergence. This encourages the former. 
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to