On Sun, 4 Jun 2006, Robin Rosenberg (list subscriber) wrote: > > Other version control systems simply treat text and binary files differently. > No smart(ass) logic doing the wrong thing. Treating text and binary file differently _is_ the "smart(ass) logic doing the wrong thing". Git really shouldn't do that. The patch was meant to show how you really don't need to - the internal objects would never be "binary vs text", there would be a way to just basically map one onto another. > > I'm absolutely _not_ suggesting merging that patch as-is or even in any > > form very close to it. It clearly needs a config file entry with filename > > patterns etc at a minimum. > > Do people apply your patches right away, like it's some god-like commandments? What's your problem here, exactly? I was just trying to point out that my patch was an example, where somebody who cares (not me) can use it as a starting point. If you can't be civil, at least be quiet, ok? Linus - : send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html