Re: [PATCH] Trick to force setup of a specific configured E-Mail per repo

> On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 12:19:20PM +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>> > I find it disappointing that we go back to looking for magic sequences
>> > in the string. Could we perhaps do this more cleanly with a new config
>> > option? Like a "user.guessIdent" which defaults to true, but people can
>> > set to false. And without that, we do not do any automagic at all; we
>> > get the values from the GIT_COMMITTER_* environment or the
>> > user.{name,email} config variables, or we die().
>> >
>> > I think that should allow your use case (and extend the same feature to
>> > user.name). It wouldn't work on older versions of git, but nor would
>> > your fix here (the only way to do that is to re-instate "(none)" as
>> > magical).
>>
>> Should we generalize this use case, i.e. define a list of
>> configuration variables that must be (re-)defined per-repo? Maybe not
>> worth it, I don't know. I can't think of any other variable that
>> should behave this way off the top of my head.
>
> That's an interesting thought, but I'm not sure how it would work. The
> ident variables are special in that people are often unhappy with the
> fallback. What would it mean for somebody to say "do not proceed if
> diff.renameLimit is not set", and where would we enforce that?