Re: [PATCH] gitweb/INSTALL: GITWEB_CONFIG_SYSTEM is for backward compatibility

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Apr 18, 2013, 01:44 UTC
Message-ID: <7v61zkd344.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAM9Z-nkG0YbudBnhcu6du824aEcXRVLCx406=kVbG83g3rFPdQ@mail.gmail.com>

Drew Northup <n1xim.email@gmail.com> writes:

Show 7 quoted lines

>> That makes it sound like the "per instance overrides common overrides
>> built-in" cascading is what is unusual and what we need to apologize
>> for.
>
> I don't think were apologizing for anything. It is helpful to say "we
> do some things differently here and don't plan on changing for a very
> important reason.

My biggest resistance against this whole thing is that word "differently".

It really depends on who reads this document. For some, it may be different. For others, it may not be unexpected at all. "We do things differently" may help the former but I do not want the latter to try to find "difference" that does not exist elsewhere and get confused.

Show 16 quoted lines

>>
>> +BUGS
>> +----
>> +Debugging would be easier if the fallback configuration file
>> +(`/etc/gitweb.conf`) and environment variable to override its location
>> +('GITWEB_CONFIG_SYSTEM') had names reflecting their "fallback" role.
>> +The current names are kept to avoid breaking working setups.
>> +
>>  ENVIRONMENT
>>  -----------
>>  The location of per-instance and system-wide configuration files can be
>
> I don't disagree with this, as some would consider the naming to be a
> bug, but after having been given a good schooling on the git list a
> while back as to why it is the way it is I'm hesitant to label "has
> history" as a bug.

BUGS section being traditionally where you would throw this kind of thing, either a bug, non-bug, or wai-but-some-may-not-agree, I think this is a good description.