From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C9FB1F6C1 for ; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 20:49:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932347AbcHOUtY (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:49:24 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:54049 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932115AbcHOUtX (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:49:23 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 757FB3499C; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:49:22 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=oGhy81mHB1eUYK3wz+oYcn3T5+s=; b=qwNzt8 ezSZvds8izAmTe7FSU25lzsCuLg6DRO1DHps8fIdV6SxcrDSeOukNKviQZL0y0jS fxn2EZ1tHlpAoaTJYRSn+QM0dMw8cRiClo76N21d00D20SCW39E3egy0tYJwcNJi EIvPInKo+qOh5l4+2UZL5b9Nltatu4rqS4iJg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=fyp4i4uZlfRo5bOX4ODR8XfuYfI/nxs8 XH5OJZBJaMm7D6zL8CAc1/OMWIM9szgEug4J1/I65PEGdNV5NY6aYGhRwvEZxUgL VomaAu3zM3C/4EFs1PWY+mK49ljlnCKoP1qpP7x50V/aZzfA+7M4qqGnhz4nJXj5 NkhwUseVDs4= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB6A3499B; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:49:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E840F3499A; Mon, 15 Aug 2016 16:49:21 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Andreas Schwab , Eli Barzilay , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Minor bug: git config ignores empty sections References: <20160815120916.6iobqirqbg76exms@sigill.intra.peff.net> <8737m63phh.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <20160815180905.znnz6evufsne5wy6@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20160815185500.htgrz3t2wkztg4ww@sigill.intra.peff.net> Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 13:49:19 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20160815185500.htgrz3t2wkztg4ww@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Mon, 15 Aug 2016 14:55:01 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BE57D914-6329-11E6-96C5-89D312518317-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: >> So a comment outside [section "name"] is tricky; it needs some >> mechanism (or convention) to tell us if it is about the particular >> section, or it is about the location in the configuration file. > > Keep in mind that even "outside" is hard, because sections do not > explicitly close. Yes, that was what I wanted to say. We'd be deep in the "convention" territory.