Re: [PATCH 3/4] builtin/clone.c: recognize fetch.serverOption configuration
Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:
Show 11 quoted lines
> I also have to agree that "push.pushOption" would be way more sensible
> if it was configured per remote. I think it would be sensible to also
> introduce "remote.*.pushOption" in the same way and have it override the
> default value of "push.pushOption" if present. So the precedence order
> would become (from high to low):
>
> - remote.someRemote.pushOption
> - remote."*".pushOption
> - push.PushOption
>
> This should be backwards compatible, too.