Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I suspect (I haven't looked very carefully for this round yet to be
> sure, though) that it may turn out that the commit you are proposing
> to revert was a misguided attempt to "fix" a non issue, or to break
> the behaviour to match a mistaken expectation. If that is the case
> then definitely the reversion is a good idea, and you should argue
> along that line of justification.
>
> We'd just be fixing an old misguided and bad change in such a case.
The original says this:
blame: correctly handle files regardless of autocrlf
If a file contained CRLF line endings in a repository with
core.autocrlf=input, then blame always marked lines as "Not
Committed Yet", even if they were unmodified. Don't attempt to
convert the line endings when creating the fake commit so that blame
works correctly regardless of the autocrlf setting.
Reported-by: Ephrim Khong <dr.khong@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>
But if autocrlf=input, then the end-user expectation is to keep the
in-repository data with LF line endings. If your tip-of-the-tree
commit incorrectly has CRLF line endings, and if you were going to
commit what is in the working tree on top, you would be correcting
that mistake by turning the in-repository data into a text file with
LF line endings, so "Not Committed Yet" _is_ the correct behaviour.
So I think that the reverting that change is the right thing to do.
It really was a change to break the behaviour to match a mistaken
expectation, I would have to say.
--
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