Show 45 quoted lines
> Now, it _does_ make sense to say "eolconv=auto", but that's because it's
> that totally different case: it's not about what the line ending
> character is, it's about whether any eol conversion is done at all. So
> for _that_ case, it makes sense to use "eolconv", although even for that
> case I think the name is not very _good_.
> So if you rename these things, keep them separate. Make the "am I a
> text-file" boolean be a boolean (plus "auto"), and just call it "text".
> And make the "what end of line to use" be just "eol" then.
>
> So you can have
>
> * text=auto,eol=crlf
>
> that means "autodetect whether it is text, and use crlf as eol".
>
> Now, I'd further suggest:
>
> - "eol=xyz" with no "text" attribute automatically implies "text" being
> true.
> - "text=xyz" with no "eol" attribute implies "eol=native"
>
> so now you can write:
>
> *.jpg -text
> *.txt text
> *.vcproj eol=crlf
> *.sh eol=lf
> * text=auto
>
> and that means:
>
> - jpg files are binary
> - *.txt files are text, and we use the default ("native") line ending for
> them (implicit, since we don't have any matcing eol rule)
> - *.vcproj files are text (implicit), and we use CRLF line endings
> - *.sh files are text (implicit), and we use UNIX style line endings
> - everything else is auto-detected, and we implicitly use native line
> endings for them
>
> Doesn't that look finally sane?
>
> Because if we really rename the attributes, let's rename them _right_.
>
> Linus
>Robert Buck <buck.robert.j@gmail.com>