Re: [PATCH 0/8] builtin/config: introduce subcommands

From: Dragan Simic <dsimic@manjaro.org>
Date: Mar 7, 2024, 00:31 UTC
Message-ID: <d3ccbb84bf3b6074d25668b2d0cd1b94@manjaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZekAWSqr9qb8FIAD@nand.local>

Hello all,

On 2024-03-07 00:46, Taylor Blau wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 09:06:08AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:
>> 
>> >   - `git config foo.bar` -> `git config get foo.bar`
>> >
>> >   - `git config foo.bar value` -> `git config set foo.bar value`
>> 
>> I actually have been perfectly OK with the above two, but I agree
>> that ...
> 
> Same here, though I think that we are probably both biased by many 
> years
> of familiarity with the existing syntax.

Ditto. Though, having "get" and "set" commands will be nice, making it all more self descriptive.

Show 7 quoted lines

>> >   - `git config foo.bar value value-pattern` -> `git config set-all
>> >     foo.bar value value-pattern`
>> 
>> ... this was less than discoverable, and would be a good update.
>> This one ...
> 
> Agreed.

Also agreed. Having the point below in mind, perhaps we could actually end up with "set --all" instead of "set-all".

Show 9 quoted lines

>> >   - `git config --get-urlmatch` -> `git config get-urlmatch`.
>> 
>> ... is a Meh to me, personally.  I'd not actively push it
>> enthusiastically, but I'd passively accept its existence.
> 
> I don't have strong feelings about this, but I wonder if `--urlmatch`
> (or `--url-match`) might be an argument to the "get" mode of this
> sub-command instead. Something like `git config get --urlmatch` feels
> much more natural to me than `git config get-urlmatch`.

Good point. I'd vote for having "get --urlmatch" or "get --url-match", because it feels more natural to me, it doesn't "clog up" the command space, and such an approach, in general, allows git-config(1) to be expanded later easier with more new arguments for the existing commands.