Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
It's perceived as not much of an issue, AFAICT, because people feel that using good editors will save you most of the time, pre-push hooks will prevent everyone from actually polluting the central repository, and it would be easy to install pre-commit hooks locally to get an early warning. ISTM that the remaining problem space is a high level of automation that some Windows developers desire, that they got from SVN, but that is quite small because there's a bunch of mitigating factors. It's perceived as a regression, and as making Windows developers second class because most of the issues won't come up on other systems.
Dirkjan's reasoning here is correct. However, we may be at the point where we've reached diminishing returns on letting this prevent the changeover - perhaps it is time to force the issue by actually switching the development process, documenting the use of the hg-eol extension for anyone that needs it and continuing on from there.
If it turns out nobody on Windows runs into EOL issues and our concerns were unfounded, then so be it - I'm not going to complain about prompting the development of an extension that brings hg's EOL handling up to par with SVN's, as I'm sure we'll be far from the last group of developers that are interested in a DVCS but want that control over EOL handling.
Cheers, Nick.