Re: Re-done kernel archive - real one?

["David A. Wheeler" <dwheeler@dwheeler.com>]

On Sun, 17 Apr 2005, Russell King wrote:
>>BTW, there appears to be "errors" in the history committed thus far.
>>I'm not sure where this came from though.  Some of them could be
>>UTF8 vs ASCII issues, ....> 
...
>>One thing which definitely needs to be considered is - what character
>>encoding are the comments to be stored as?

Linus Torvalds replied:
> To git, it's just a byte stream, and you can have binary comments if you
> want to. I personally would prefer to move towards UTF eventually, but I
> really don't think it matters a whole lot as long as 99.9% of everything
> we'd see there is still 7-bit ascii.

I would _heartily_ recommend moving towards UTF-8 as the
internal charset for all comments.  Alternatives are possible
(e.g., recording the charset in the header), but they're
incredibly messy.  Even if you don't normally work in UTF-8,
it's pretty easy to set most editors up to read & write UTF-8.
Having the data stored as a constant charset eliminates
a raft of error-prone code.

--- David A. Wheeler