Re: eol style differences

Philip Martin wrote:

>Branko ÄŒibej <brane@xbc.nu> writes:
>
>
>Huh? Isn't that an example of eol-conversion being a bad thing? If
>the CVS repository files were in the correct format, and got copied
>unchanged into the tarball, it would just work.
>
svn:eol-style isn't just about EOL *conversion*. It's also about
asserting a particular EOL style. "native" is just one of the possible
values.

>I think eol conversion is a patently ridiculous thing for a version
>control system to do. However, it looks like I'll just have to live
>with it.
>
>
I agree that it's not strictly the version control system's job, but
experience shows that we have to do something. Up to now, I think that
we at least got the design better than CVS (or ClearCase) does. I agree
there are still edge cases, most of which (I think) we see because a
propset on the svn:eol-style prop isn't treated as a text change.

As for non-Subversion clients -- Well, by default, we don't do
*anything* with line endings. So if you expect to use
non-svn:eol-style-aware clients, don't use svn:eol-style. It's not as if
we're forcing people to use this feature.

-- 
Brane Čibej   <brane_at_xbc.nu>   http://www.xbc.nu/brane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org