On Thu, Aug 28, 2025 at 2:22 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I am not a huge fan of configuration variables that do not have a > command line option. Assuming that it is not like you'd be doing > overly huge range-diff that would not fit your memory every day, > shouldn't we start this with a command line option without a > configuration variable to gauge how useful it would be for users > with such a need, and then after it proves useful and we identify a > workflow where a user would be passing this option all the time, add > a configuration to allow it always be in effect (with command line > override still available)? Isn't that what Paulo's patch does? Maybe I'm just blind, but I've looked over the patch a couple times and don't see where he's reading from a configuration variable; am I just missing it?
