# Re: \[PATCH v5 0/2\] branch: inherit tracking configs

- From: Johannes Schindelin \<hidden\>
- Date: 2021-12-10 22:49:08 
- List: git
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/git/2021/12/7915482
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/git/2021/12/7914191/t.md

```text
Hi,

On Tue, 7 Dec 2021, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Josh Steadmon [ref] writes:
>
> > I've addressed feedback from V4. Since 2/3 reviewers seemed to (at least
> > slightly) prefer handling multiple upstream branches in the existing
> > tracking setup, I've gone that direction rather than repurposing the
> > branch copy code. None of the other issues were controversial.
> >
> > In this version, I'd appreciate feedback mainly on patch 1:
> > * Is the combination of `git_config_set_gently()` +
> >   `git_config_set_multivar_gently() the best way to write multiple
> >   config entries for the same key?
>
> IIRC git_config_set_*() is Dscho's brainchild.  If he is available
> to comment, it may be a valuable input.

The `git_config_set_multivar_gently()` function was really only intended
to add one key/value pair.

Currently, there is no function to add multiple key/value pairs, and while
it is slightly wasteful to lock the config multiple times to write a bunch
of key/value pairs, it is not the worst in the world for a small use case
like this one.

So yes, for the moment I would go with the suggested design.

One thing you might want to do is to avoid the extra
`git_config_set_gently()` before the `for` loop, simply by passing `i == 0
? 0 : CONFIG_FLAGS_MULTI_REPLACE` as `flags` parameter to the multivar
version of the function.

But that would optimize for code size rather than for readability, and I
would actually prefer the more verbose version.

Ciao,
Dscho
```