From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH] Respect crlf attribute even if core.autocrlf has not been set Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:23:27 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <20080722231153.GN2925@dpotapov.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com To: Dmitry Potapov X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jul 23 01:25:11 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KLRDY-0000Fp-IP for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 01:24:28 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756795AbYGVXX3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:23:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757303AbYGVXX3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:23:29 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:50207 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1757452AbYGVXX1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:23:27 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 22 Jul 2008 23:23:25 -0000 Received: from grape.st-and.ac.uk (EHLO grape.st-and.ac.uk) [138.251.155.28] by mail.gmx.net (mp023) with SMTP; 23 Jul 2008 01:23:25 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18JkMdGcIIJ2AJAU7ihGkkmV9T1vPL2+MUDz/XGaz cS8h0C2rs3xu93 X-X-Sender: gene099@racer In-Reply-To: <20080722231153.GN2925@dpotapov.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.62 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Wed, 23 Jul 2008, Dmitry Potapov wrote: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:56:04PM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > When a file's crlf attribute is explicitely set, it does not make > > sense to ignore it, just because the config variable core.autocrlf has > > not been set. > > Hmm... About a week ago, I was about to propose the same change, but > after reading documentation and some thinking I was not able to convince > myself that this change would be the right thing to do. Well, I have a shared repository, where I set the attribute. Now, every once in a while, people check in text _with_ CR/LF. Yes, that is right, I marked it explicitely as crlf, yet I am on the whim of the people choosing to set the config variable or not. And I could not care less what the documentation says: if it does not make sense, it does not make sense. > > +test_expect_success 'attribute crlf is heeded even without core.autocrlf' ' > > s/heeded/needed/ Nope. "heeded" is what I meant. I am not a native speaker, so this could be wrong. But "needed" is not what I meant (the sentence would not make sense with "needed"). Ciao, Dscho