{"thread":{"id":"45185","subject":"[RFC] Subtle differences in passing configs to git clone","startedAt":"2017-02-21T11:36:36Z","lastAt":"2017-02-21T17:48:01Z","messageCount":2,"participants":["Lars Schneider","Jeff King"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"312196","messageId":"EC270E42-9431-446C-96F9-E1A0C3E45333@gmail.com","threadId":"45185","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[RFC] Subtle differences in passing configs to git clone","fromName":"Lars Schneider","fromEmail":"larsxschneider@gmail.com","sentAt":"2017-02-21T11:36:25Z","receivedAt":"2017-02-21T11:36:36Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"larsxschneider@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/477434?v=4"},"body":"Hi,\n\nI stumbled across the following today:\n\n(1) git -c foo.bar=\"foobar\" clone <URL>\n\n--> uses the config temporarily\n\n\n(2) git clone -c foo.bar=\"foobar\" <URL>\n\n--> uses the config and writes it to .git/config\n\n\nThis was introduced in 84054f7 (\"clone: accept config options on the \ncommand line\") and it makes total sense. However, I think this subtitle\ndifference can easily confuse users.\n\nI think we should tell the users that we've written to .git/config.\nMaybe something like this:\n\ngit clone -c foo.bar=\"foobar\" <URL>\nCloning into 'test'...\nWriting foo.bar=\"foobar\" to local config...\nremote: Counting objects: 2152, done.\nremote: Compressing objects: 100% (33/33), done.\nremote: Total 2152 (delta 19), reused 0 (delta 0), pack-reused 2119\nReceiving objects: 100% (2152/2152), 328.66 KiB | 217.00 KiB/s, done.\nResolving deltas: 100% (1289/1289), done.\n\nWhat do you think?\n\nThanks,\nLars\n"},{"id":"312208","messageId":"20170221174737.qpg6dawdvhntuikm@sigill.intra.peff.net","threadId":"45185","inReplyTo":"EC270E42-9431-446C-96F9-E1A0C3E45333@gmail.com","subject":"Re: [RFC] Subtle differences in passing configs to git clone","fromName":"Jeff King","fromEmail":"peff@peff.net","sentAt":"2017-02-21T17:47:38Z","receivedAt":"2017-02-21T17:48:01Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"peff@peff.net","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/45925?v=4"},"body":"On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 12:36:25PM +0100, Lars Schneider wrote:\n\n> I stumbled across the following today:\n> \n> (1) git -c foo.bar=\"foobar\" clone <URL>\n> \n> --> uses the config temporarily\n> \n> \n> (2) git clone -c foo.bar=\"foobar\" <URL>\n> \n> --> uses the config and writes it to .git/config\n> \n> This was introduced in 84054f7 (\"clone: accept config options on the \n> command line\") and it makes total sense.\n\nYep, they were designed to match.\n\n> However, I think this subtitle difference can easily confuse users.\n> \n> I think we should tell the users that we've written to .git/config.\n> Maybe something like this:\n> \n> git clone -c foo.bar=\"foobar\" <URL>\n> Cloning into 'test'...\n> Writing foo.bar=\"foobar\" to local config...\n> remote: Counting objects: 2152, done.\n> remote: Compressing objects: 100% (33/33), done.\n> remote: Total 2152 (delta 19), reused 0 (delta 0), pack-reused 2119\n> Receiving objects: 100% (2152/2152), 328.66 KiB | 217.00 KiB/s, done.\n> Resolving deltas: 100% (1289/1289), done.\n> \n> What do you think?\n\n<shrug> I don't find it confusing, but I can see how one might. Since\n\"clone\" is already pretty chatty, I don't mind adding the extra message.\n\n-Peff\n"}]}