From: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 12:47:19 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] config: add '--sources' option to print the source of a config value
Message-ID: <56BB3157.7080307@ramsayjones.plus.com>
In-Reply-To: <1455099198-11515-1-git-send-email-larsxschneider@gmail.com>



On 10/02/16 10:13, larsxschneider@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@gmail.com>
> 
> If config values are queried using 'git config' (e.g. via '--list' flag
> or the '--get*' flags) then it is sometimes hard to find the
> configuration file where the values were defined.
> 
> Teach 'git config' the '--sources' option to print the source
> configuration file for every printed value.
> 
> Based-on-patch-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
> Signed-off-by: Lars Schneider <larsxschneider@gmail.com>
> ---
> 
> diff to v1:
> 
> * add documention
> * produce a consistent (tab-delimited) format that can be parsed
> * adhere declaration-after-statement style
> * prefix every source line with the source type (file, stdin, blob, cmd)
> * add relative path test case
> * add blob ref test case
> * add "git config --local" test case (Note: I think I found a bug there that I
>   plan to fix/investigate in a seperate patch. Is it ok to leave the TODO?)
> * add a test case to check funny character escapes (file name with tabs)
> 
> Sebastian suggested "--show-origin" as a better option name over "--sources".
> I still believe "--sources" might be slightly better as I fear that users could
> somehow related "origin" to "remote" kind of configs. However, I am happy to
> change that if a majority prefers "--show-origin".

<bikeshed>
As I have said before, I'm not very good at naming things, but ...

Of the two, I *slightly* prefer --show-origin, since I don't think
there will be any confusion. However, I think --source may be OK too
(for some reason it sounds better than the plural). Another idea
may be --show-source. ;-)

</bikeshed>

ATB,
Ramsay Jones