Re: core.autocrlf considered half-assed

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mar 7, 2010, 23:45 UTC
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1003071538350.30214@localhost.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <20100307092701.GC31105@dpotapov.dyndns.org>

On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Dmitry Potapov wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> 
> Well, I agree there are some issues with it. In particularly, when
> someone changes core.autocrlf in his/her repository, and then git
> behavior is outright confusing. IMHO, the nuts of the problem is that
> does not store in the index how files were checkout. Instead it uses
> core.autocrlf, which specifies how the user _wants_ files to be check-
> out. So, when the autocrlf option changes, things get very confusing.

I do agree. It would probably have been a good idea to mark the CRLF status in the index, but we didn't. And crlf isn't actually the _only_ thing that can cause confusion, the 'ident' and 'filter' can do the same thing.

One option might be to have "git config" know about crlf, so that if you change crlf state with 'git config' rather than manually, we could at least _warn_ about the effects and tell people that they may need to do a full new checkout (or reset the stat info in the index, or whatever). But I like editing config files by hand, and I don't think I'm the only one.

			Linus