From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from ra.horus-it.com (ra.horus-it.com [65.108.3.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88F471EEEA for ; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 15:57:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=65.108.3.114 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709827043; cv=none; b=jaR97JWXIKNku2l4KKsbWA+dNmeDR2ihIy/EZ3ZNNiOIiTO6K2lD6Dpq9tOfAGJf+6k2UCwfh/GJpXPMeCp9iJ1t3NkcyBdFseh7GkwBVsFAYIZsXAdowQYN7FVTGFc+1wdMiOv/9Quvy5+bJZNiNopWpY1ZHmYuJL6kl2iCuFc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709827043; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cGHOuFKqY0uOfYPhKPunMRwmRW34tN8QwIM6IG9pi6Y=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Z2BsBW0RthZ5RiyOPohQLENMfkchqxTBsNK6UUKrgLUy3vJY3k2lb9IeW5GEytO+cByBogRF5FbtQhu1F0T+EanZH0NiDMuSgPX8AazyN0cJZupVohZWI7ZScffPA3d8oEtmvvNIqgc/sA8Uoi7xbAAZK/uYfu8bM/tdWZ5gIF4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=seichter.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=seichter.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=seichter.de header.i=@seichter.de header.b=fxRU5fHh; arc=none smtp.client-ip=65.108.3.114 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=seichter.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=seichter.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=seichter.de header.i=@seichter.de header.b="fxRU5fHh" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ra.horus-it.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1DABBE0031; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 16:57:16 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: at horus-it.com Received: from ra (ra.horus-it.com [IPv6:2a01:4f9:6a:528d::a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1) server-digest SHA384) (Client did not present a certificate) by ra.horus-it.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEC37BE002F; Thu, 7 Mar 2024 16:57:16 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=seichter.de; s=k23; t=1709827036; bh=cGHOuFKqY0uOfYPhKPunMRwmRW34tN8QwIM6IG9pi6Y=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: Content-Type; b=fxRU5fHhlSqktIfBzQtOyN2KYg6tNgB99t8svvxOLZsdK1ZhhVBsBdeFtEW+fI6WQ V+iWuFtPP7CgtkNdB77osbGou0QHTwzHO244oDs8ZSnsflqYhuJaZazNm5if8+DHv0 jFdbrEVzwR6r7xYzcgbT+2SimQegjY2Jmq0QsbWfV8UELudt2VrAoOzYLxnCmN0eCk 8FKOE0cTshGDnR7u+1eKozhhkdOmFgaryb2QOHGJXcV9gqrwpDGncEpnI0c0LtpOgm K/EiN1rvJxC51bayJrlPnAuYsW9z0Jjes8tNP9VsidUHVWyrAtwDabKVTIadq6HVn7 k2ExIEGmOmskw== From: Ralph Seichter To: rsbecker@nexbridge.com, 'Ralph Seichter' , 'Junio C Hamano' Cc: gitgitgadget@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org Subject: RE: [PATCH] Allow git-config to append a comment In-Reply-To: <09c501da70a5$bd2f4f40$378dedc0$@nexbridge.com> References: <2560952c-4495-4a71-9497-aa40032e1d2b@seichter.de> <098101da7096$cd773d40$6865b7c0$@nexbridge.com> <87h6higj1a.fsf@ra.horus-it.com> <09c501da70a5$bd2f4f40$378dedc0$@nexbridge.com> Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2024 16:57:16 +0100 Message-ID: <87wmqevxur.fsf@ra.horus-it.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain * rsbecker@nexbridge.com: > My purpose is just to highlight, for the purpose of reviewing the > change, that there may be unintended impacts, that's all. I see. Have you perhaps spotted a flaw in the patch which might cause problems? If so, I'd like to address it. > With git config moving comments around, responsibility shifts to git - > a.k.a., unintended consequences. It is important to note that my implementation does not engage in "moving comments around" at all. It merely supports adding comment suffixes to config lines *while they are created by git-config*. No after-the-fact comment manipulation is done. There are no multiline comments involved either, which I should have mentioned from the get-go. The limited scope of my proposal is deliberate, and aimed at avoiding possible problems based on the design alone. -Ralph