From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 251021F406 for ; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 05:35:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751122AbdLMFfx (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Dec 2017 00:35:53 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:34104 "EHLO mail-wm0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750819AbdLMFfw (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Dec 2017 00:35:52 -0500 Received: by mail-wm0-f44.google.com with SMTP id y82so20136561wmg.1 for ; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 21:35:51 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=M+gUSuYeWDy8Tz8K99BwWU9YbYz4Epf18W2SUtYU31g=; b=k0bzFw8Yl9+GX8r6L1Rh+CPmZibKGylpeMxvjKb3f0rjIrUCqya8x8P3en1TAuCtbG YPsT70wYQQdKQR0WxcihofkNYtozcdUZtJs4tmgNWtBsDA3swNR/oiibpzG7jysWVwyW owxsZGQPPi1ZAohdMj9DBTA7bDcdBx5/lskJ3gFLz7EZOklaWHFGt6Fb9s87xON1goFf 3L6baK8sYABsYlh86AFGa0eonxAhtlbQAHpGZIpeP9a6Af5G0aEGPx+tELmbD3hwvyx2 OLKIN53Ihl+SBSwN63cIZ7J6p5V1JMIO0kne9gxjaBGbqegGozKfkXQxBsbdRk+JEDCT T7lw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=M+gUSuYeWDy8Tz8K99BwWU9YbYz4Epf18W2SUtYU31g=; b=YMSbjrCBM8cjm4VTqt6EIOQ18cAcIJti9txSVWup01PMJtm9cvf4MQEoj9XSAzHpJ4 BTAoRPFGJZoSE1TNDNyMJqcdQyM4KeZjO77neEKE6IR/51rJM9Vtq78zjsDs3KFnQ/4n 0cu/rEzIcbxjQWUr1wTZmEkDyEBBaro1C3W7DkFoqiLBvCDN7iCjNO25AyOxpxfk/Fd3 F6+y0Yp/Z1YY7Nbg2cA3vXuV/FKlG2PpaHRnI69ddqAgDxu8CUxGKXXKds+LLxGFdjwR UQk4ySTKJVaMkUtjktvENdDWxDUFW71HDGOKTA3N0nqtT/e7o2MCAbX8vPlrJstYF+YN OcDw== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mKG3ySZ5H6R+pegFA+/bd2Yqjml7Bhn+FvooZPeX5bpHr/Pj8Cm iUmKyUuqc0FFTiaNc3ZxbIEVi4Z1F6ukbWHeVSM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBovzvoePY+5b9EMRQNosH2+Ke9zEY9PW7r3T/RYnGklvD+qS8G6jRJxEpva+RgchhHEcGkX414+waBjtQNd4DRs= X-Received: by 10.80.165.109 with SMTP id z42mr5815643edb.18.1513143351107; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 21:35:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.80.174.252 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Dec 2017 21:35:30 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20171211211102.rrxqd6yscnd33efd@hopa.kiewit.dartmouth.edu> <20171211225615.GC214273@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com> From: Jacob Keller Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 21:35:30 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Q: rational for $XDG_CONFIG_HOME/git/config to be "non global" or just a bug? To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jonathan Nieder , Yaroslav Halchenko , "git@vger.kernel.org" , kyle@kyleam.com, Jeff King Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:36 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jacob Keller writes: > >>> I actually thought that the plan was "you either have this, or the >>> other one, never both at the same time" (and I think those who >>> pushed the XDG thing in to the system made us favor it over the >>> traditional one). So as long as --global updates the one that >>> exists, and updates XDG one when both or neither do, I think we >>> should be OK. And from that viewpoint, we definitely do not want >>> two kinds of --global to pretend as if we support use of both at the >>> same time. >> >> It appears that we actually prefer ~/.gitconfig rather than XDG_CONFIG_HOME.. >> >> And at least based on current cursory testing on the command line, we >> do both read and write to the proper location, assuming that >> ~/.gitconfig is preferred over $XDG_CONFIG_HOME. > > OK, so I misremembered the details but it seems that the behaviour > is consistent and there is no ambiguity? > > Am I reading you correctly? As far as I could tell based on local testing. I could be wrong, and haven't yet cooked up a test case for it yet. Thanks, Jake