Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 20513 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2005 01:47:30 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Dec 2005 01:47:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 53242 invoked by uid 500); 2 Dec 2005 01:47:25 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-dev-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 53184 invoked by uid 500); 2 Dec 2005 01:47:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list dev@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 53161 invoked by uid 99); 2 Dec 2005 01:47:25 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:47:25 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of kevan.miller@gmail.com designates 64.233.182.207 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.182.207] (HELO nproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.182.207) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:48:52 -0800 Received: by nproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id b2so178490nfe for ; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:47:00 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=LSkV1u9W62SwBIJfAUuX+usExYdj/cvb+e9lqzJV8t1SQ/sGxz9goCYVNIzGKn/DgWZf06uoO02r25Jz9QqJ9Pdw+3sDnbIONmlE7e7SlqFr6RRnvK2lS1CLaKiPYTbdi+XAgUtstxMKYcPZG0/YS6cOwA8grQSEhE56e0Bqf1I= Received: by 10.48.143.17 with SMTP id q17mr586718nfd; Thu, 01 Dec 2005 17:47:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.48.225.7 with HTTP; Thu, 1 Dec 2005 17:47:00 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 20:47:00 -0500 From: Kevan Miller To: dev@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: Editable files other than .bat and .sh files and CRs LFs In-Reply-To: <438F72CA.1040502@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_14170_20656391.1133488020600" References: <438EA152.8090205@gmail.com> <438F72CA.1040502@gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N ------=_Part_14170_20656391.1133488020600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On 12/1/05, John Sisson wrote: > > Kevan Miller wrote: > > > Rather than using the archive format to determine the linebreak > > convention, I would prefer an explicit build option (build for CR or > > build for CR/LF). Also, having Windows specific archive(s) might imply > > that there is more OS-specific behavior than we really have... > > > > All of our previous Milestone distributions have used CR's only, has > > this posed a problem to Windows users? It hasn't really been a problem > > for me developing on a Windows platform... I wonder if Geronimo users > > would be happy with CR-only distributions until we're ready to offer > > truly integrated Windows-specific behavior... > > I think you mean LF instead of CR in your last paragraph. I assume that > all the previous distributions used LF's because they were built on > non-Windows platforms. If I build Geronimo on Windows today the *.xml, > *.txt, etc. files in the distribution files will contain CR/LF's. When > that distribution is used on a non-Windows platform the CR's cause the > problem demonstrated in my vi example in the original mail. You are correct. I knew I was going to get myself turned around... I understand the problem you are addressing... In summary, the contents of the distribution files are not the same > between builds on Windows and non-Windows platforms, which is bad. It > should not matter what platform a release is built on. Totally agree. Since this is a 1.0 release, now is the opportunity to do better than > some other projects and provide the files with the correct linebreak > convention for *NIX and Windows platforms to ensure a positive user > experience (e.g. Windows users don't get prompted to convert to DOS > format with some editors when they edit files). > > I don't think we want to be providing two forms of zip and tar.gz files > one with CR and the other with CR/LF. *NIX users should always use the > tar.gz files so they get permissions set on files, therefore it seems > reasonable to assume that the zip distribution will only be used by > Windows users. I'm probably generating more discussion than this topic merits, but simply generating files with CR/LF's and calling it a "Windows distribution" doesn't seem like enough. Unless Windows users were complaining, I'd just build LF-only distributions from all build platforms. Now, if we built a Windows distribution which contained only .bat files (no .sh files) and appropriate CR/LF's (and vice versa), then it seems like we're making an honest effort towards OS-specific distributions... I'm sure that would be much more involved than your current proposal. I'm +1 for creating consistent distributions regardless of the build platform. I'm +0 for making zip files use CR/LF and not doing more to creat= e OS-specific distributions... --kevan Thoughts? > > John > > > > > --kevan > > > > On 12/1/05, *John Sisson* < jrsisson@gmail.com > > > wrote: > > > > Currently if you build a Geronimo distribution on Windows, and > install > > on a *NIX platform, files such XML and property files will contain > > carriage returns. > > > > This is ugly if you are attempting to edit an XML plan using > > something > > like the vi editor that displays the carriage returns as ^M. > > > > This also is a problem for the viewable files in the root directory > of > > the install, such as the README.txt file. > > > > We could fix this by using the fixcrlf task (in the same place I > > did for > > GERONIMO-1232) and making the assumption that the zip distribution > > will > > only be used on Windows and the tar.gz distributions only used on > *NIX > > platforms. This would allow people to use native editors on their > > platform (e.g. vi or notepad on windows) without having any > problems. > > > > Is this a reasonable assumption to make? Of course we could > > explicitly > > state on the download page what the difference between the > > distributions > > would be. > > > > John > > > > Here is an example of me trying to edit an XML file using vi on > > Solaris > > (when built from Windows): > > > > ^M > > ^M > > ^M > > ^M > > ^M > >