Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Bug in CRLF conversions

[Zbynek Winkler]

rghetta wrote:

> > Btw, something in Yury's example made me think a bit, and it occured
> > to me that if the database line ending would be CRLF and we only
> > convert from and to the platform specific line ending, we would have
> > something reversible the way I understand "reversible" (this is under
> > the condition that no file ever magically appears in the database
> > without having been committed to it).  And in this case, it would work
> > to do this with ALL files back and forth, even non-transformables.
> >    
> I don't understand what you mean. Under your definition of
> non-transformable and reversible, any file with embedded CRLF can't be
> properly converted "back and forth".
> Trasformable files, however, can be converted correctly wathever is the
> normalized line ending.
>  
+1 Wouldn't this be a good check to determine what is transformable file?

> I think monotone should *not* change the file unless instructed to do
> so, i.e. every file should be non-transformable by default.
>  
Are we talking about what the default lua hook should do?

> Transformable files instead could be converted between "equivalent"
> forms, e.g. with a different line endings, with a final line ending
> sequence attached, a different encoding, and so on.
> Even these transformations should be explicitly requested, imho.
>
> Perhaps we should consider a set of attributes (explicitly or through
> tables) describing how to treat a file when committing, merging,
> checking out.
> Some of these attributes could be overriden by the user, to allow for
> different line ending or merge tool preferences.
>  
I think we could still get away without attributes... IMHO we could even 
get away without migration... Monotone could just start treating the 
untransformable files as such, could it not?

Zbynek

--
http://zw.matfyz.cz/     http://robotika.cz/
Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic