Re: How to use git attributes to configure server-side checks?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 09/23/2011 02:49 PM, Stephen Bash wrote:
> We're in the process of a similar change over (we're dealing with EOL
> rather than indents), but I attacked it from a different angle...  I
> wrote our update script to examine modified files and ensure
> compliance (diff-tree -r, iterate over blobs).  That way legacy files
> are left alone (even in master), but active development must live up
> to the current rules.  Is there a reason you need to go tree-by-tree
> rather than file-by-file?

I want to avoid code churn, especially in third-party code.  With your
solution, I believe that we would be forced to entirely clean up any
file that we needed to touch.  The resulting code churn would make
integrating future upstream releases a nightmare.

For some kinds of checks, one could only check that the *lines* changed
satisfy the new rules.

But rather than thinking up workarounds, it seems like a better idea to
fix git to handle .gitattributes correctly.

Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: 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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]