Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > So anyway, that is an alternate strategy, but I think I like "canonical > in-repo text is utf-8" approach a lot more, since then git operations > work consistently. There are still a few rough edges (e.g., I'm not sure Sounds like a good way forward. > if you could apply a utf-8 patch directly to a utf-16 working tree file. > Certainly not using "patch", but I'm not sure how well "git apply" would > handle that case either). But I think it would mostly Just Work as long > as people were willing to set their encoding attributes. It should work (or fail) just like applying LF patch to CRLF working tree, so I wouldn't worry too much about it. Thanks.
