Re: [PATCH RFC3.5 03/12] send-email: Interpret --smtp-server "" as "use a default".
From: Michael Witten <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:46:37
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 20:41, Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] wrote:
Michael Witten [off-list ref] writes:quoted
Why not? It's at least useful for testing.Why so? "Use a default" as opposed to using what?
Use a default as opposed to using the nonsensical empty string.
It is unclear what "a default" is in this context. Do configured values count as "a default"? I suspect not. I think you meant "allow overriding the configured values and use the default", but then you should spell what the defaults are (an available local MTA binary, or SMTP port on localhost, I think). That is much more informative than your "Why not?..."
I see your irritation is derived from my carefree (careless?) commit message. However, the patch doesn't do anything but trigger the already present default-selecting code; there are already docs that specify what those defaults are.
In any case, I find it counterintuitive to trigger "use the default" with an option. Something like "--ignore-config=smtp-server,smtp-port" might make sense, though.
I can get behind that kind of solution; however, I see no problem with the shorthand --smtp-server "" either (other than the fact that it requires an extra test in order to work).