Last day to vote/reject on proposed EOL names

[Mark Hammond]

To follow up my previous mail...

On 31/03/2009 4:38 PM, Alexander Belchenko wrote:

> Because there are existing [windows] users with their repos, and they most likely
> has crlf committed. If somebody switch their committed files from crlf to lf
> then annotations will be lost.

Can't conversion to the EOL-enabled format handle this?

> Because sometimes user *need* file in the some already known eol style.
> I've explained this many times in the past: I did checkout of shell script on windows
> with native (crlf) and then copy this file to test on Linux over ssh.
> It will fail to run because bash don't understand cr in the shebang.

I'd suggest this file be treated as 'binary' then.  The shell script is 
no use to native windows (or if it is, it will be via cygwin etc, so \n 
will be fine) - so having that file be \n everywhere seems the correct 
solution.  Beyond that it is a tool issue - you are using an editor 
which mangles the line endings - but that isn't bzr's fault.  IOW, it is 
the reverse of the "old visual studio tools" scenario - except this time 
it is the gnu based tools which are brain dead :)

Cheers,

Mark