From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael Haggerty Subject: Re: How to use git attributes to configure server-side checks? Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 15:31:12 +0200 Message-ID: <4E7C8A20.8050100@alum.mit.edu> References: <33047451.27244.1316782148569.JavaMail.root@mail.hq.genarts.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git discussion list , Jay Soffian , Jeff King , Jakub Narebski , Junio C Hamano To: Stephen Bash X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Sep 23 15:31:31 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R75qj-00007e-Rz for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 15:31:30 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754048Ab1IWNbZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Sep 2011 09:31:25 -0400 Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:60119 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752987Ab1IWNbZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 23 Sep 2011 09:31:25 -0400 X-Envelope-From: mhagger@alum.mit.edu Received: from [192.168.100.152] (ssh.berlin.jpk.com [212.222.128.135]) (authenticated bits=0) by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.13.6/8.13.6/Debian-1) with ESMTP id p8NDVCfM013351 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 23 Sep 2011 15:31:13 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.21) Gecko/20110831 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.13 In-Reply-To: <33047451.27244.1316782148569.JavaMail.root@mail.hq.genarts.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang_at_IN-Berlin_e.V. on 192.109.42.8 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On 09/23/2011 02:49 PM, Stephen Bash wrote: > We're in the process of a similar change over (we're dealing with EOL > rather than indents), but I attacked it from a different angle... I > wrote our update script to examine modified files and ensure > compliance (diff-tree -r, iterate over blobs). That way legacy files > are left alone (even in master), but active development must live up > to the current rules. Is there a reason you need to go tree-by-tree > rather than file-by-file? I want to avoid code churn, especially in third-party code. With your solution, I believe that we would be forced to entirely clean up any file that we needed to touch. The resulting code churn would make integrating future upstream releases a nightmare. For some kinds of checks, one could only check that the *lines* changed satisfy the new rules. But rather than thinking up workarounds, it seems like a better idea to fix git to handle .gitattributes correctly. Michael -- Michael Haggerty mhagger@alum.mit.edu http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/