Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] builtin/config.c: prefer `--type=bool` over `--bool`, etc.

[Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>]

On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 06:29:18PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 10:00 PM, Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> wrote:
> > [...]
> > In this patch, we prefer `--type=[int|bool|bool-or-int|...]` over
> > `--int`, `--bool`, and etc. This allows the aforementioned upcoming
> > patch to support querying a color value with a default via `--type=color
> > --default=....`
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
> > ---
> > diff --git a/Documentation/git-config.txt b/Documentation/git-config.txt
> > @@ -38,12 +38,10 @@ existing values that match the regexp are updated or unset.  If
> > +A type specifier may be given as an argument to `--type` to make 'git config'
>
> In [1], you said that the argument to --type is required, so use of
> "may be given" here is ambiguous; it makes it sound as if the argument
> is optional. Perhaps rewrite something like:
>
>     The --type option requests `git config` to ...

Thanks; I agree that this is much clearer.

> Not necessarily worth a re-roll, though. (But if you do need to
> re-roll for some reason, it might make sense to combine this series
> with the --default series to make it slightly easier to review them
> together -- since the one depends upon the other -- and probably ease
> the burden on Junio slightly.)

I am re-rolling for some of the additional feedback, and have included
the above changes in it. That being the case, I think that I would like
to hold off on merging the two together, since they are separate topics
and should be merged as-such.

If this list feels differently, however, I can happily merge the two.

> > diff --git a/t/t1300-repo-config.sh b/t/t1300-repo-config.sh
> > @@ -1622,4 +1623,21 @@ test_expect_success 'later legacy specifiers are given precedence' '
> > +test_expect_success '--no-type unsets type specifiers' '
> > +       echo "10" > expect &&
> > +       git config --type=bool --no-type core.number >actual &&
> > +       test_cmp expect actual
> > +'
>
> What does --no-type mean and why is it being tested? If this is an
> explicitly supported user-facing option, should it be documented? If
> it's not meant to be user-facing, then why are we enforcing its
> presence and behavior via a test?

I think that --no-type should be documented. It means "unset any
previously set --type=<type> or --<type>". For example, "git config
--type=bool --no-type core.var" is a synonym of "git config core.var".

This option is useful for callers that would like to overwrite scripts
that impose a specific type specifier. (For example, my mail script
invokes "git format-patch --thread $@", but I can disable threading if I
run my script with "--no-thread".)

Thanks,
Taylor