From dev-return-10713-apmail-openjpa-dev-archive=openjpa.apache.org@openjpa.apache.org Fri Feb 27 23:43:09 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-openjpa-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 696 invoked from network); 27 Feb 2009 23:43:09 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 27 Feb 2009 23:43:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 17096 invoked by uid 500); 27 Feb 2009 23:43:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-openjpa-dev-archive@openjpa.apache.org Received: (qmail 17067 invoked by uid 500); 27 Feb 2009 23:43:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@openjpa.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@openjpa.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@openjpa.apache.org Received: (qmail 17056 invoked by uid 99); 27 Feb 2009 23:43:08 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:43:08 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of michael.d.dick@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.161 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.161] (HELO mail-fx0-f161.google.com) (209.85.220.161) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:43:00 +0000 Received: by fxm5 with SMTP id 5so1261943fxm.9 for ; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:42:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=mDWEj+EKyMeJV80NWFL5C9f3VHY+X+oTiC+gRloj9E8=; b=P/3II964EEbnqG4tyFwyjqW5qsSKTtHmQhOnFAVGnz4A4hR4A9Hgh147X+Dj85WrsZ 00Er0IsHAoqQXq3g3dCQcFMy5pe2NR6AdvXAlxrXSf9078CBPpE+GMDhxCvT8aBHj4lv 10PISYzjdxZymCKtxn2FUiVJXPFbl6MySW8x0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=LV7m1N9RvdTsGniSvLfO2wnKpHcNIhziaORYwc74sSc5sciy0Ph0ys0CqAX2rAiDx0 CFvMuXWA87iaw/3sPrlJt6gfjdlv8dq4ABJ25Fk3lmPCCiOhKwYlyasUCSzOJAJtC736 XITjt8D2R7V/E1N322A9iOiiBOEYy8Ylhsg2Q= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.119.198 with SMTP id a6mr3832105far.42.1235778160153; Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:42:40 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <89c0c52c0902271339q4105e39bne1d8de70c1ca1119@mail.gmail.com> References: <104861739.1233765599720.JavaMail.jira@brutus> <72c1350f0902041302j52a4f02dgf4bf4b48daae275c@mail.gmail.com> <89c0c52c0902041344g7d674f16r165350ef3760881a@mail.gmail.com> <1F780DF8-A15C-4506-A919-EA69B6DF277D@SUN.com> <49A44E00.1050906@apache.org> <9ED783B0-57A9-4FF2-9821-28B7F98D6607@SUN.com> <49A6AF73.10602@apache.org> <72c1350f0902261540x799bfe95m672d7a1a413c019e@mail.gmail.com> <49A85AD8.1030501@apache.org> <89c0c52c0902271339q4105e39bne1d8de70c1ca1119@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 17:42:40 -0600 Message-ID: <72c1350f0902271542j1d3d671fl201480f0014765d0@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: Is it time to fix the svn:eol-style properties? From: Michael Dick To: dev@openjpa.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5b91e41d58e0463ef0668 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --001636c5b91e41d58e0463ef0668 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I've been using svn diff and I haven't hit the problem on Linux. Maybe that's because I have configured my client the "right" way. Potential contributors might not know they need to do that though. AIUI the changes to svn props will prevent windows eol characters from being inserted for the files that currently exist. The end line policy for new files will depend the committer to configure their svn client correctly or to manually set the property on the file. The potential commit is rather large svn diff results in 379,000 lines for trunk. I suppose I could make it worse by converting tabs to spaces too ;-) -mike On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Kevin Sutter wrote: > Hi Don, > Yes, we've seen this before, but only with Eclipse patch creators. And, > with the proper Eclipse settings, the patches are created just fine. Mike > creates his patches via the svn diff command line and he doesn't hit this > problem (that I know of). > > That's why I am scratching my head on this request and string of notes. > I'm > just not clear on what the problem is that we're trying to resolve. And, > will these proposed changes prevent users from accidentally committing > changes that would cause the problem again? > > Kevin > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 3:27 PM, Donald Woods wrote: > --001636c5b91e41d58e0463ef0668--