On Jan 11, 2008, at 7:10 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:

quoted text
>
>
> On Fri, 11 Jan 2008, Steffen Prohaska wrote:
>>
>> Ah sorry, I misunderstood you in [1].  I thought your last point
>> "Mixed Windows usage" meant what I have in mind:  A user working
>> in a mixed Windows/Unix environment who creates a file using
>> Windows tools and commits it in the Unix environment.  In this
>> case the CRLF file will be transferred from Windows to Unix
>> without git being involved.  The right thing for git on Unix is
>> to remove CRLF during a commit but still write only LF during
>> check out.  So autocrlf=input is the right choice.
>
> Oh, ok, I didn't realize.
>
> But yes, if you use a network share across windows and Unixand  
> actually
> *share* the working tree over it, then yes, you'd want  
> "autocrlf=input" on
> the unix side.
>
> However, I think that falls under the "0.1%" case, not the "99.9%"  
> case.
>
> I realize that people probably do that more often with centralized
> systems, but with a distributed thing, it probably makes a *ton* more
> sense to have separate trees. But I could kind of see having a shared
> development directory and accessing it from different types of  
> machines
> too.

It just happens yesterday that I copied a file from Unix to Windows
(lucky I am ;) for a quite simple reason.  I fetched and merged and
realized that another developer forgot to check in a new file. He
had already left.  So I just looked into his workspace and copied
the file.  This has nothing to do with centralized system or not.
We're just working in a mixed OS environment with shared filesystems.

I didn't even think about the line endings in this situation because
everything just worked.  Actually I like the idea that I do not
need to think about the endings because git will care about them.
Actually many other tools work well with CRLF.  For example, vi
just displays [dos] in its status bar; but besides this everything
is just fine.


quoted text
> I'd also bet that crlf behavior of git itself will be the *least*  
> of your
> problems in that situation. You'd have all the *other* tools to worry
> about, and would probably be very aware indeed of any CRLF issues.  
> So  at
> that point, the "automatic" or default behaviour is probably not a big
> deal, because everything _else_ you do likely needs special effort  
> too!

I don't think so.  In the setting I described above, the questions I  
receive
are not about the other tools but about git.  I already started to teach
everyone the new "autocrlf=input" policy to avoid these questions.  I  
don't
care that much about potential file corruption (though I'd feel more
comfortable if I knew git would have stronger guarantees).  During  
the next
checkout on Windows file corruption would happen anyway.

	Steffen

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html