Andreas Schleifer

Do we really need to rework the config structure? As far as I see the `extract_repos()` call just adds some information, but I think the current sync could work without...

Also in your example the `git` config is a bit redundant if fetch and push urls are the same. Is that explicit to make the coding easier?

> > Do we really need to rework the config structure? As far as I see the extract_repos() call just adds some information, but I think the current sync could...

```yaml ~/work/: libtmux: vcs: 'git' remotes: origin: 'https://github.com/vcs-python/vcspull.git' libtmux_mirrored_remotes: vcs: 'git' remotes: origin: 'ssh//[email protected]/vcs-python/vcspull.git' fetch: 'https://github.com/vcs-python/vcspull.git' MySVNProject: vcs: 'svn' url: http://unladen-swallow.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/ ```

We should also think of adding some kind of config validation between reading the config from the file and actually using it.

Thanks for adding the scripts to the documentation ( https://vcspull.git-pull.com/config-generation.html ). If desired I can try to update the shell script to remove some of the differences between the two...

Nice work. I will look into it as soon as I find time. But one thing I saw already. You are using a 3 digit version number which implies you...

@tony in regards to developing this: Is there already a method in the code to write a loaded config back into the yaml/json config structure? Obviously this would be needed...

Hm the "problem" is that `load_config()` is using kaptan but then calls `extract_repos()` which enriches the config file. to be honest the original kaptan output is much easier to work...

I agree. Can we rip it out? :D