On Feb 8, 2013, at 4:50 PM, Eric Hodel wrote:

> On Feb 7, 2013, at 17:37, David MacMahon <davidm / astro.berkeley.edu> =
wrote:
>> Just to play Devil's advocate, could that not be separated into two =
different hashes: one for config options and one for command default =
arguments?  You have given semantic meaning to (the class of) the key.  =
Isn't that akin to treating the primary key of a database record in a =
non-opaque manner?
>=20
> Two hashes would not be backwards compatible with previous versions of =
RubyGems.  I'm hesitant to change the format of a configuration file and =
break downgrades between RubyGems versions.
>=20
> It would be more confusing to new users.  Now we can tell users "paste =
'=85' into ~/.gemrc to do =85" and it will work.  They don't need to =
know anything about ruby or yaml to do this.
>=20
> If matz decides that we should break backwards compatibility in this =
manner I will change my mind.

I was not trying to induce change.  I think my follow-on query would =
have been more appropriate for ruby-talk rather than ruby-core.  I will =
(try to) keep my ruby-core postings more on topic.

Thanks for the explanation,
Dave

P.S.  Sorry if this gets out more than once.  I'm in the midst of an =
involuntary email "transition".