Re: What is missing from Git v2.0

From: luc.linux@mailoo.org <luc.linux@mailoo.org>
Date: Apr 24, 2014, 19:55 UTC
Message-ID: <20140424195559.GA1336@luc-arch>
In-Reply-To: <20140424134106.GA27035@thunk.org>

On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 09:41:06AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 03:23:54AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> Creating a ~/.gitconfig file if one doesn't already is one I agree
> with, and at least on Unix systems, telling them that the config file
> lives in ~/.gitconfig, or where ever it might happen to be on other
> platforms, is a good one.  If it's in some really weird place on
> Windows, then sure, we can tell them about "git config -e".  But the
> point is to let the user look at the default .gitconfig file, where we
> can put in comments to help explain what is going on, and perhaps have
> links to web pages for more information.

I think the idea of a commented gitconfig is a good solution. We could include default aliases commented, so that a new user would just have to uncomment them. That way, he will understand they are aliases and not commands, learn how to tune them to its own needs and it won't annoy anyone because they will be commented by default, ideally with explicit commentaries around them.

Furthermore, this could be a good way to show a new user all the possibilities of git, or at least its configuration. Documentation is a good thing when you know what you are looking for, but when you are beginning, you don't know what can be done, and reading a complete and commented example configuration could be a good way to discover it.