[MERGE] OSX test suite passing (well as of 2008/09/08 :)

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


...

> So, I'll summarize as follows:
> 
> - internally, bzr represent file names as NFC normalized, utf-8
>   encoded strings,

  - at one point, bzr internally represented file names as NFC
    normalized, Unicode strings.

I've somewhat given up on that because of people who want mixed strings,
and it fighting with people who want automatic normalization between
platforms.

I we don't force normalization on Win32 and Linux, but *do* enforce it
on Mac (because we know Mac "renames" stuff), then *sometimes* people
will commit non-normalized filenames on Windows, and then when they
check it out on Mac it will appear renamed.

Compare that to never normalizing, where people check in NFC names on
Linux, and then we re-normalize for Mac. Probably we would get *more*
cases correct, but we still lose edge cases.


> 
> - it checks, during add and rename that files are in a canonical
>   form,
> 
> - using non-NFC encoding file systems requires transcoding at
>   various points.
> 
> The last point being the one that needs an unknown amount of work
> to be 100% correct.
> 

And hasn't been proven to be a win for the "majority" of users. (Why
force NFC encoding on Windows/Linux for people who may never check the
code out on Mac? etc)

My current idea was to just reduce the internal checking, let people
version any Unicode name they want. And let people on Mac suffer the
consequences of a filesystem that doesn't play the same rules everyone
else does. I just didn't get far enough through to ripping out all of
the normalization checks.

We should do a proper fix and audit the code. It just hasn't been a high
priority. Also, I haven't found anyone else particularly interested in
the topic.

And *I* don't version non-ascii filenames at this time, nor do I have a
habit of checking them out on other platforms. (Mac used to be my
primary laptop, but is not anymore.)

...

> 
> Since the modifications were really minor, I'll submit to pqm, I
> let you decide whether it's worth including in 1.7.
> 
>     Vincent

Thanks. I don't have specific plans to bring this into 1.7 now that
we've passed rc. Unless it does more than effect the test suite?

John
=:->

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Cygwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkjJhdwACgkQJdeBCYSNAAM0ywCgpzsbDpTnGd1QYQEH1ps1D5Tp
IgoAoJ2qJHcmXlvSitCKEQARIIryxqqi
=xQGb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----