Re: [PATCH/RFC] blame: CRLF in the working tree and LF in the repo

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Apr 27, 2015, 17:47 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqa8xtxy32.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqzj5uxhls.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 8 quoted lines

> I suspect (I haven't looked very carefully for this round yet to be
> sure, though) that it may turn out that the commit you are proposing
> to revert was a misguided attempt to "fix" a non issue, or to break
> the behaviour to match a mistaken expectation.  If that is the case
> then definitely the reversion is a good idea, and you should argue
> along that line of justification.
>
> We'd just be fixing an old misguided and bad change in such a case.

The original says this:

    blame: correctly handle files regardless of autocrlf
    
    If a file contained CRLF line endings in a repository with
    core.autocrlf=input, then blame always marked lines as "Not
    Committed Yet", even if they were unmodified.  Don't attempt to
    convert the line endings when creating the fake commit so that blame
    works correctly regardless of the autocrlf setting.
    
    Reported-by: Ephrim Khong <dr.khong@gmail.com>
    Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
    Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

But if autocrlf=input, then the end-user expectation is to keep the in-repository data with LF line endings. If your tip-of-the-tree commit incorrectly has CRLF line endings, and if you were going to commit what is in the working tree on top, you would be correcting that mistake by turning the in-repository data into a text file with LF line endings, so "Not Committed Yet" _is_ the correct behaviour.

So I think that the reverting that change is the right thing to do. It really was a change to break the behaviour to match a mistaken expectation, I would have to say.