Re: What's cooking extra
- From
Dmitry Potapov <dpotapov@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 24, 2010, 12:47 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20100524124734.GD3005@dpotapov.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20100524094905.GA10811@localhost>
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:49:05AM +0200, Clemens Buchacher wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> > Just because a feature is requested doesn't mean it's useful, or > even harmless. This has nothing to do with version control in the > first place, so I do not see why we should suffer the additional > complication.
IMHO, ability to enforce a specific for particular types of files is a good thing, and if you can say that these files must have CRLF, it should be possible to say that those files must have LF. At least, it would be a logic thing to do. I don't see how it can be harmful.
> > With CRLF file in the repository, core.autocrlf=true and > core.eol=lf,
I wonder if this combination should be allowed. core.autocrlf=true always implied that the native EOL is CRLF. So I do not think any reasonable behavior can be deduced for this combination. Can you imagine _anyone_ who would want to have such settings? Otherwise, it is better to error out if this combination is encountered.
Dmitry