Re: [PATCH 0/8] config-include fixes
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Feb 16, 2012, 20:11 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v1upuzgfr.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20120216080102.GA11793@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
Show 5 quoted lines
> I prepared this on top of what you have queued in jk/config-include. > However, all of the cleanup is semantically independent of the topic > (though there are a few minor textual conflicts). If I were re-rolling, > I would put it all at the front, then squash patch 8 into my prior > "implement config includes" patch.
Sorry for being late in answering the "revert or build on top" question; I was mostly offline yesterday afternoon.
Show 10 quoted lines
> [7/8]: config: eliminate config_exclusive_filename > > This is all cleanup which makes config_exclusive_filename go away. It's > not strictly necessary for this series, but it's something I've been > wanting to clean up for a while. And it does fix a few minor bugs (see > patch 6/8). And the refactoring in 5/8 lays the groundwork for 8/8. > > [8/8]: config: do not respect includes for single-file --list > > The actual fix for the regression in my config-include patch.
Thanks.
Looking at the rebased result, it strikes me that with_options version
Furthermore, by providing a more "advanced" interface, we
now have a a natural place to add new options for callers
like git-config, which care about tweaking the specifics of
config lookup, without disturbing the large number of
"simple" users (i.e., every other part of git).perhaps wants to get a pointer to struct config_lookup_options, instead of us having to add a new parameter to all callsites every time a new need is discovered.