From: Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2007 08:58:54 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Quick description of possible gitattributes system
Message-ID: <200703020858.58741.andyparkins@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vps7smevd.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On Friday 2007 March 02 04:46, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Thinking about this a bit more, I take this "syntax" part back.
> One-line-per-record format is much nicer if we want to keep this
> information in .gitattributes files in-tree, especially because

That was my original thought.  However, it occurred to me that we might have 
an implicit handler for .gitattributes that said

[handler "attributesfile"]
  merge = builtin-attributes-merge

So you don't necessarily have to keep it line based (although I suppose that 
is easier than writing a special merger).


Andy
-- 
Dr Andy Parkins, M Eng (hons), MIET
andyparkins@gmail.com