On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 11:13:34AM +0100, Torsten Bögershausen wrote: > Just to confirm my missing knowledge here: > Does this mean, that git-gui and gitk can decode/reencode > the content of a file/blob, when the .gitattributes say so ? That's my impression, yes. > If yes, would it make sense to enhance the "git diff" instead ? > "git diff --encoding" will pick up the commited encoding from > .attributes, convert it into UTF-8, and run the diff ? You can do something like this already: git config diff.utf16.textconv 'iconv -f utf16 -t utf8' echo file diff=utf16 >.gitattributes I have no objection to teaching it that "encoding" means roughly the same thing, which would have two advantages: - we could do it in-process, which would be much faster - we could skip the extra config step, which is a blocker for server-side diffs on sites like GitHub I don't think you'd really need "--encoding". This could just be triggered by the normal "--textconv" rules (i.e., just treat this "as if" the textconv above was configured when we see an encoding attribute). > We actually could enhance the "git diff" output with a single > line saying > "Git index-encoding=cp1251" > or so, which can be picked up by "git apply". That extends it beyond what textconv can do (we assume that textconv patches are _just_ for human consumption, and can't be applied). And it would mean you'd potentially want to trigger it in more places. On the other hand, I don't know that we're guaranteed that a round-trip between encodings will produce a byte-wise identical result. The nice thing about piggy-backing on textconv is that it's already dealt with that problem. -Peff
