From: Segher B. <se...@ke...> - 2010-12-08 03:15:27
|
>>> > With modifications in the tarball, unless you have changed your mind > and >>> > now >>> > support listing nearly every file in .gitattributes. >>> >>> I'm not sure what you're saying here. The tarball will have plain LF >>> for everything since that's how stuff appears in the repo. > > And I was requesting a version be available that is crlf, since tar does > not > have an autocrlf option last I checked like git does. If the crlf version > is zip and the lf version is tgz, that would be very natural. Zip can handle text vs. binary files. I'm not so sure gitweb actually handles this though :-( > My point is that I was already aware of the link you > pointed to on gitweb, and I don't think that satisfies the criteria I've > listed, or even one of the ones you listed (autogen). Yes, I've never seen the point in getting source snapshots anyway -- just get the whole repo, git compresses really well. >>> (except msvc project files and "binary" stuff like that), > > Ok, this is a tangent, but the msvc files are "text", unless you're > reversing your opinion from what you said earlier: "A 'text' file, from > the > user's point of view, is anything that is, well, text: documentation > files, > C source files, build system files, etc." There you go, build system > files. Erm, I don't consider any of the MSVC files as "build system". The MSVC maintainers can do whatever they want with them, as long as I can treat them as a black box that just sits as dead weight in some subdir I don't have to look at. I was under the impression Pete wants those files checked in with CRLF and everything, that's all I meant. It seems to me they will work fine also if checked in as LF like everything else, but I don't care, and I don't really even want to know. "Build system" is the autoXXXX stuff, makefiles, that kind of thing. Stuff that humans can edit without GUIs ;-) >>> > That too, but per commit. >>> >>> Not sure what you say here either -- you want a "release snapshot" >>> for every commit? Well, every commit on master? > > Dunno about the "release" part, but yes snapshot. We have discussed in > the > past having this available per commit on any repo, particularly Pete's. Wow. Luckily libusb isn't very big, or that would take a lot of space and time to generate! > And > really I'm just advocating for what I would want if I weren't already > involved with libusb (and therefore using my git repo); in a sense, I > won't > lose a whole lot of sleep if the snapshots do not become available, but I > figure there might be users out there who would want something similar. I don't see it being useful, but if the server admin allows it, why not eh. > I also have no interest in binaries, but I'm in the minority on that one. It's a strange world! /me thinks mswindows devs have arsenic in their DNA. Segher |