[MERGE] integrated EOL conversion support

Ian Clatworthy ian.clatworthy at internode.on.net
Sat Mar 28 14:35:20 GMT 2009

Alexander Belchenko wrote:
> Ian Clatworthy пишет:

>> Thinking out loud, I wonder whether "windows" would be a better
>> choice than "dos"? I'm probably showing my age by using the latter.
> I'd prefer 'CRLF' and 'LF' instead of 'dos' and 'unix'.

Based on your suggestion and mailing list feedback, I've gone with
'lf' and 'crlf' in the attached patch. (I prefer lower-case values as
they are softer on the eyes.)

I've also expanded the documentation with more information and more
examples, and included explicit tests for binary file handling.
Can you re-run the latest tests please?

>> I'm also considering adding a value called "clean". That would work
>> exactly like "exact" except it would warn if mixed line-endings
>> were found in a file. What do you think? Git has something like this
>> so I gather it's of value to users.

I've explained in a separate email why I think, after further reflection,
"eol = clean" is the wrong approach. We should make it easy to check that
certain files meet certain rules but that's best done outside the eol
conversion filter IMO.

> I think it makes sense. Especially when people want to clean their hairy files.

Maybe "eol = auto" can clean files by detecting the right convention,
from the first line say. Anyhow, it's a frill that can come in a later

Ian C.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: eol-conversion-2.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 26211 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20090329/6d9d3e69/attachment-0001.bin 

More information about the bazaar mailing list