Re: [PATCH] Colourise git-branch output

On Mon, 11 Dec 2006, Sean wrote:

Technically it is workable.. but why even start down the road of having
anything but branch names after a "branch."?   There has to be a better
spot for this variable, and it makes it more future proof, as you
highlighted.

I do agree with Sean, both for the stability reason, but perhaps even more 
because I personally think it would just be better to have a separate 
"[color]" subsection.

In fact, I'd almost prefer to see

	[color]
		diff = auto

over

	[diff]
		color = auto

exactly because once we have different things that take colorization 
arguments, it's just nicer to have them all together (and we already have 
"status", and now we're getting "branch" too.