From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: git-config: case insensitivity for subsections Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 17:39:52 -0400 Message-ID: <20110825213952.GA16914@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20110818063528.GH13342@hal.rescomp.berkeley.edu> <20110825205849.GA10384@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vpqjti3dq.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: milki , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Aug 25 23:40:02 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qwheb-0004LR-I3 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Aug 2011 23:40:01 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755499Ab1HYVj4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2011 17:39:56 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:46893 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755492Ab1HYVjz (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2011 17:39:55 -0400 Received: (qmail 20505 invoked by uid 107); 25 Aug 2011 21:40:38 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Thu, 25 Aug 2011 17:40:38 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 25 Aug 2011 17:39:52 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vpqjti3dq.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 02:32:17PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > I'm not sure it makes sense to do so. I can see how: > > > > [section.SUBSECTION] > > > > and > > > > [section.subsection] > > > > should be merged. But isn't: > > > > [section "SUBSECTION"] > > > > conceptually a different section entirely? > > I still recall getting scolded by Linus after writing [sec.tion]; this was > way back when he was still active on this list. I essentially was told > that [sec "tion"] is _the_ only supported way, and [sec.tion] may work but > it purely does by accident, not by design. Hmm. It is a little weird that color.branch.local would have to be spelled: [color "branch"] local = blue and that the "branch" must be case-sensitive. But then, that wouldn't be my first complaint about our config syntax, which sort of pretends to be hierarchical (with the dot-syntax) but isn't really. E.g., I'd really much rather it be spelled: [color] branch.local = blue > Do we still even list the bogus [section.SUBSECTION] syntax anywhere in > our docs? If so, we should remove them and if not we simply just should > deprecate the code to read such input. It's in Documentation/config.txt. It seems to blame to e136f33 (Documentation/config.txt: Document config file syntax better, 2007-01-22). -Peff