Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] diff: update conflict handling for whitespace to issue a warning

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2024 10:23:02 +0900

Phillip Wood <[email-masked]> writes:

> Arguably yes, but that's not the approach we take when the attributes
> file is too large, a line in the file is is too long or the file
> contains a negative filename pattern. For those cases we print a
> warning and continue. The recently merged e36f009e69b (merge: replace
> atoi() with strtol_i() for marker size validation, 2024-10-24)
> followed suit and warns rather than dies for an invalid marker
> size. It would be nice to be consistent in the way we treat invalid
> attributes.

Arguably yes, but being careful when adding a new check and changing
established behaviour, risking to break existing users, are different.

> Consistently dying and telling the user how to fix the
> problem would be a reasonable approach on the client side but I wonder
> if it could cause problems for forges running "git diff" and "git
> merge-tree" on a server though.

That's an interesting aspect.  I wonder what happens when somebody
pushes a project with a .gitattributes with such a conflicting
setting to GitHub or GitLab.

Would that bring the world to its end ;-)?