Re: [PATCH 0/2] config includes, take 2

> On Tue, Feb 07, 2012 at 11:16:47AM -0800, Jakub Narebski wrote:
> > Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> > 
> > [...]
> > > Git-config could potentially help with that (and even simplify the
> > > current code) by allowing something like:
> > > 
> > >   $ git config --list-with-sources
> > >   /home/peff/.gitconfig user.name=Jeff King
> > >   /home/peff/.gitconfig user.email=peff@peff.net
> > >   .git/config core.repositoryformatversion=0
> > >   .git/config core.bare=false
> > >   [etc]
> > > 
> > > (you would use the "-z" form, of course, and the filenames would be
> > > NUL-separated, but I made up a human-readable output format above for
> > > illustration purposes).
> > 
> > That would be _very_ nice to have (even without includes support).
> > 
> > Filenames would be git-quoted like in ls-tree / diff-tree output without -z,
> > isn't it?  And is that TAB or SPC as a separator?
> 
> So the patch would look something like this. However, is the actual
> filename really what callers want? It seems like in David's case, an
> annotation of "repo", "global", or "system" (possibly in addition to the
> filename) would be the most useful (because in the git-cola UI, it is
> still nice to list things as "repo" or "global" instead of spewing the
> whole filename at the user -- but you would still want the individual
> filename for handling updates of includes).