From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63CED1F859 for ; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 20:46:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758398AbcHYUqe (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2016 16:46:34 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:54143 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757807AbcHYUq2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Aug 2016 16:46:28 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D35E36E87; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 16:46:22 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=XwFt3uIK/Yq6KTpZEeN6Nw8joLE=; b=oRFl7k Xoqsn0/OQDrUpK7GNdTDSjRSEga0orIF2IU7ZNRa79wSXrUTj6ZMvAmGZvnwxeMA Ivzhqf4pRM5QUdQy/nKyIkwJ+PIaTvu5KvR+9ozLaoXZPWajuScmuLsNDgA+wsu9 hIesGV2RruHplUMxS2JJc7yjEQTGMZLYhNQAk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=gv5MuWkFVHbqLt4hgLA1HoNw8NQKJU8h IhJ0XG+Z+6ge2qhmsjnl5pnpg6nfPt6oVnu///2GY77vGb0blxhheB1q9dgFJyTH i+oi+XY1k08APnIWAp2x/crV1IkF6ihqqHgtM7BNl99dxCHDbCJd7NyFhVEa+cgN 87856GxLh/M= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9612036E86; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 16:46:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 197F536E85; Thu, 25 Aug 2016 16:46:22 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: tboegi@web.de Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] gitattributes: Document the unified "auto" handling References: <20160809114938.pcrvirrzrh6ldmnr@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20160825155258.29007-1-tboegi@web.de> Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2016 13:46:20 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20160825155258.29007-1-tboegi@web.de> (tboegi@web.de's message of "Thu, 25 Aug 2016 17:52:58 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: FB4749C6-6B04-11E6-8EA3-51057B1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org tboegi@web.de writes: > +If you want to ensure that text files that any contributor introduces to > +the repository have their line endings normalized, you could set the > +`text` attribute to "auto" for _all_ files. > + > +------------------------ > +* text=auto > +------------------------ > + That is very understandable, especially that the text before this added paragraph is about "core.autocrlf" configuration that is about "your" changes. It contrasts gitconfig vs gitattributes very well. However, it is no longer clear what "you should instead" in the existing paragraph attempts to contrast with. "If you want all text files, then use '* text=auto'" is what is said previously. And your updated example below says "If you do not want that, and instead you want X, do '*.txt text'". But the value of X is reads the same as the above one: "you want all text files to be normalized". > If you want to interoperate with a source code management system that > enforces end-of-line normalization, or you simply want all text files > in your repository to be normalized, you should instead set the `text` > -attribute to "auto" for _all_ files. > +attribute to "text" for text files. > > ------------------------ > -* text=auto > +*.txt text > ------------------------ In short, the above is incoherent and not understandable, without updating the three lines of introductory text you left untouched at the beginning of the paragraph, when read in the (updated) context. > -This ensures that all files that Git considers to be text will have > +This ensures that all files marked as text will have This is a good update of the description to match the updated example.