Re: [PATCH 0/4] Don't warn about missing EOL for symlinks

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Jun 3, 2010, 17:07 UTC
Message-ID: <20100603170724.GB22779@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <4C07C2E8.508@drmicha.warpmail.net>

On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 04:57:44PM +0200, Michael J Gruber wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> May I kindly direct you to the next parts you cut out, especially the
> one talking about "described thorougly along with the
> rationale in 3/4", and to the commit message of 3/4? :)
> 
> I'm not breaking existing tests, of course, which also test
> format-patch/apply cycles with symlinks.

Yes, but you are breaking "git diff | git apply", aren't you? It is already broken with textconv, but that is a new feature that people opt into by using it. Symlink patches are a feature that has worked fine until now with the above command.

I don't think "but they should be using plumbing to generate patches" is the right answer, either. Yes, we expect the diff porcelain to behave differently depending on configuration, but with the exception of textconv, it always produces an actual applicable patch.

-Peff