From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] config: read system-wide defaults from /etc/gitconfig Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 03:26:36 -0800 Message-ID: <7vr6srd5lf.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <200702140909.28369.andyparkins@gmail.com> <7vfy98snus.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <200702151019.25409.andyparkins@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin , Peter Baumann To: Andy Parkins X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Feb 15 12:27:05 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HHelT-0007i0-NT for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 12:27:04 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965882AbXBOL0j (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:26:39 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965890AbXBOL0j (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:26:39 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao104.cox.net ([68.230.241.42]:39067 "EHLO fed1rmmtao104.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965882AbXBOL0i (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:26:38 -0500 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao104.cox.net (InterMail vM.7.05.02.00 201-2174-114-20060621) with ESMTP id <20070215112638.YYKT22948.fed1rmmtao104.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:26:38 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id PnSc1W00J1kojtg0000000; Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:26:37 -0500 In-Reply-To: <200702151019.25409.andyparkins@gmail.com> (Andy Parkins's message of "Thu, 15 Feb 2007 10:19:24 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Andy Parkins writes: > On Wednesday 2007 February 14 16:30, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Site-wide configuration for options that are potentially >> compatibility-breaking is a bad idea on a multi-user machines, >> and it was certainly the case back when our machines hosted many >> diverse set of people. > > Isn't it more likely that on a multi-user machine all users are sharing one > install of git - in which case you do want the upgrade of facilities to be > system-wide. Not really. Some repositories would need to be accessible by people with older git coming over the network. Some don't.