From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Importing Mozilla CVS into git Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 16:19:14 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <9e4733910606011521n106f8f24s6c7053ce51e3791e@mail.gmail.com> <200606042144.45385.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com> <200606042325.58884.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Jakub Narebski , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jun 05 01:19:29 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fn1sV-0000Ut-KG for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 05 Jun 2006 01:19:28 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932313AbWFDXTY (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jun 2006 19:19:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932314AbWFDXTY (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jun 2006 19:19:24 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:9699 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932313AbWFDXTY (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jun 2006 19:19:24 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k54NJG2g013956 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Sun, 4 Jun 2006 16:19:16 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k54NJEa4027179; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 16:19:15 -0700 To: "Robin Rosenberg (list subscriber)" In-Reply-To: <200606042325.58884.robin.rosenberg.lists@dewire.com> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.75__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.135 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, 4 Jun 2006, Robin Rosenberg (list subscriber) wrote: > > Your patch assumes all files are text and the transformation doesn't corrupt > the file, which isn't true. How do you think things get done? You test the _technology_ first, and then if that is shown to be workable in a real environment, _then_ do you actually add the polish to make it useful. That was all the patch was. A technology demonstration. I'd really like to hear whether it works in a simple CR/LF environment, because if it doesn't, then it needs some totally different approach. And yes, I could test it myself, but (a) I'm way too lazy and (b) I consciously try to get others involved because it's a better long-term strategy (because I expect to be ay too lazy in the future too) Linus