Re: git: cannot rename foo to Foo on a case-insensitive filesystem (e.g. on Windows)

> On Wed, 29 Aug 2007, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
>
>> El 28/8/2007, a las 22:45, Johannes Schindelin escribi?:
>>
>>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
>>>
>>>> Personally, I don't like HFS+ much at all, but your statement that
>>>> Mac OS X "doesn't even have a case sensitive filesystem" is false.
>>>
>>> It is right that they support it.  But since the _default_ is case
>>> insensitive (but only as long as it is not _reporting_ file  
>>> names), it
>>> is _as bad_ as "doesn't even have a case sensitive filesystem".  No
>>> sophistry helps here.
>>
>> I don't think my correction qualifies as "sophistry" by any  
>> reasonable
>> definition of the word. Andreas claimed that Apple had turned "a
>> perfectly decent unix-clone such as FreeBSD into some defect  
>> monstrosity
>> that doesn't even have a case sensitive filesystem"; I merely  
>> sought to
>> correct his misstatement.
>
> I acknowledged that.
>
> But it does not change the _meaning_ of Andreas' criticism.  They  
> took a
> perfectly sane system, and turned it into a mess.

> El 29/8/2007, a las 4:23, Johannes Schindelin escribió:
>
>> On Wed, 29 Aug 2007, Wincent Colaiuta wrote:
>>
>> But it does not change the _meaning_ of Andreas' criticism.  They
>> took a perfectly sane system, and turned it into a mess.
>
> While I agree that most just accept the default, your argument here
> and in your previous email is spurious; it amounts to saying "A and
> B is offered, but because A is the default it is the same as if B
> were not supported at all", which isn't valid logic. If you limited
> your argument to criticizing case-insensitive filesystems then I
> would have to agree with you; I am not a fan of them. Likewise, if
> you said that the default has undesirable consequences I would also
> concur.  It's your attempt to extend your claim to an argument for
> equivalence that I can't buy.

>> Plenty of people have this setup
>
> Agreed...
>
>> and we have to suffer.
>
> but, don't you think you're exaggerating a bit here? How much
> "suffering" has this really caused you? I gather that you're not
> even a user of that operating system;

> I am (have been since the first developer previews), have always
> accepted the default filesystem choice, don't even like the
> filesystem (have ranted repeatedly about its flakiness on my
> weblog), but I think I've run into case- insensitivity issues two
> times. If you want to talk about "suffering" then ask me about HFS+
> data integrity.

>>> Plenty of people have this setup
>>
>> Agreed...
>>
>>> and we have to suffer.
>>
>> but, don't you think you're exaggerating a bit here? How much
>> "suffering" has this really caused you? I gather that you're not
>> even a user of that operating system;
>
> He is the main worker on the MSYS port of git as far as I can tell,
> while not using Windows as his work platform.  So indeed he gets to
> bear _all_ the pain, and no personal gain.

> El 29/8/2007, a las 4:23, Johannes Schindelin escribió:
> 
>>
>> I acknowledged that.
>>
>> But it does not change the _meaning_ of Andreas' criticism.  They took a
>> perfectly sane system, and turned it into a mess.
> 
> I don't think it's productive to enter into arguments about whether a 
> particular operating system is a "monstrosity", "sane" or "a mess"; 
> that's why I limited my comment to a correction of a factual 
> misstatement by Andreas and left the opinion part unchallenged. We could 
> have avoided this thread if instead of "doesn't even have a case 
> sensitive filesystem", he'd started his flame with "defaults to a using 
> a case-insensitive filesystem".
> 
>> Yes, you _can_ change the setting.  No, most don't.  Yes, the effect 
>> is...
>> you guessed it: the same as if they did not allow case sensitivity at 
>> all.
> 
> While I agree that most just accept the default, your argument here and 
> in your previous email is spurious; it amounts to saying "A and B is 
> offered, but because A is the default it is the same as if B were not 
> supported at all", which isn't valid logic. If you limited your argument 
> to criticizing case-insensitive filesystems then I would have to agree 
> with you; I am not a fan of them. Likewise, if you said that the default 
> has undesirable consequences I would also concur. It's your attempt to 
> extend your claim to an argument for equivalence that I can't buy.
> 

> 
>> and we have to suffer.
> 
> but, don't you think you're exaggerating a bit here? How much 
> "suffering" has this really caused you?

> And if you use that algorithm, them 'ß' and 'ss' are equal in a 
> case-insensitive filesystem. 
>
> Does anybody do that? I don't know. But I sure as hell wouldn't be 
> surprised.