From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Erik Faye-Lund Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] git-svn: support fetch with autocrlf on Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 01:27:53 +0100 Message-ID: <40aa078e1002131627x10fb9dfaq479b731f16d816aa@mail.gmail.com> References: <1265997155-3592-1-git-send-email-kusmabite@gmail.com> <1265997155-3592-2-git-send-email-kusmabite@gmail.com> <20100213122532.GA31653@dcvr.yhbt.net> <40aa078e1002130616u478397c0xf757d5424630e6cf@mail.gmail.com> Reply-To: kusmabite@gmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Eric Wong , git To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Feb 14 01:28:22 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NgSLT-0001c2-8B for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sun, 14 Feb 2010 01:28:19 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758081Ab0BNA1z (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:27:55 -0500 Received: from mail-ew0-f228.google.com ([209.85.219.228]:57118 "EHLO mail-ew0-f228.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751464Ab0BNA1y (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:27:54 -0500 Received: by ewy28 with SMTP id 28so3010985ewy.28 for ; Sat, 13 Feb 2010 16:27:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:reply-to:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=MUEeabRvA96anPE2rsRsDCcJyIl86mBm+3TAs00Kfaw=; b=b2zsF/+PXOcJAfNaEh/PqjgPIkjRvHkcmOG3E3mg4br8hX9rHJun4lUr+IKY25VT+4 al0/c4M5mq5qeJ1LuvenLgHB9IijKHQs78cBHgipD5eK7O9EB3WVm3JQx5vEVyn7mOfK 3TWb4x+o1HMFOwY/hDCC7PkdcTmLYJnDvUv9U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=XU6WzD6gZzNbcfBVBZ2wOHi9IbmlULFwqcOt3FxNVp/L4HGHQDJI4MBd/v0mqUl3WT X51CcxU2ESF5D2MPmnpTORSN97WONy0BR4GfGBMgjVZHT85q6O8pfAL73Bxp6z/8Bm0d 7WXEa7RkSwnvnQO2YUi9ihlDx/udHaXHs4CdI= Received: by 10.216.86.82 with SMTP id v60mr1594038wee.180.1266107273390; Sat, 13 Feb 2010 16:27:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 12:59 AM, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010, Erik Faye-Lund wrote: > >> I don't think it affects svn dcommit in any way, except from the >> implicit svn rebase that svn dcommit performs. d3c9634e sets >> core.autocrlf to "false" on init, but re-enabling it hasn't shown any >> problems in my end. I'm using git-svn with these patches and >> core.autocrlf enabled every day at my day-job. > > To elicit a warm and fuzzy feeling about your patch, you will have to > analyze the code paaths of dcommit, and how crlf affects them. Then you > will have to describe why dcommit does not have a problem with crlf with > your patches anymore. > > Remember, the idea of a commit message is to optimize the overall time > balance, i.e. avoid the many to perform what the one can do for them. And > since you have to do that analysis for yourself anyway, it makes sense to > write up the result in the commit message. > I'm sorry, but I'm confused. What missed from my commit message? The question of dcommit was a question that Eric asked, and I'm not really sure why he did. I tried to explain why in my reply. d3c9634e never was about dcommit the way I understand it, but about clone: http://code.google.com/p/msysgit/issues/detail?id=232 If there's something that isn't sufficiently explained in the commit message, I'd like to know so I can improve it for the next round... -- Erik "kusma" Faye-Lund