On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:36:25PM +0100, Lars Schneider wrote:
> I stumbled across the following today:
>
> (1) git -c foo.bar="foobar" clone
>
> --> uses the config temporarily
>
>
> (2) git clone -c foo.bar="foobar"
>
> --> uses the config and writes it to .git/config
>
> This was introduced in 84054f7 ("clone: accept config options on the
> command line") and it makes total sense.
Yep, they were designed to match.
> However, I think this subtitle difference can easily confuse users.
>
> I think we should tell the users that we've written to .git/config.
> Maybe something like this:
>
> git clone -c foo.bar="foobar"
> Cloning into 'test'...
> Writing foo.bar="foobar" to local config...
> remote: Counting objects: 2152, done.
> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (33/33), done.
> remote: Total 2152 (delta 19), reused 0 (delta 0), pack-reused 2119
> Receiving objects: 100% (2152/2152), 328.66 KiB | 217.00 KiB/s, done.
> Resolving deltas: 100% (1289/1289), done.
>
> What do you think?
I don't find it confusing, but I can see how one might. Since
"clone" is already pretty chatty, I don't mind adding the extra message.
-Peff
