2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15 · open the first message on its own page
From: Matthieu Moy <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:48:48
Joe Brenner [off-list ref] writes:
You won't get any benefit out of things like "git diff" either. The diffs we have (these days at least) don't work well on anything but plain text.
Not totally true. textconv filter is just great when working when word-processors (with the filter being odt2txt or antiword). -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:48:48
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 01:42:58PM +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:
Joe Brenner [off-list ref] writes:quoted
You won't get any benefit out of things like "git diff" either. The diffs we have (these days at least) don't work well on anything but plain text.Not totally true. textconv filter is just great when working when word-processors (with the filter being odt2txt or antiword).
I agree. Whoever wrote the textconv code was a genius. ;) But I did want to note that textconv is just _one_ way of seeing the data. You can also have git invoke custom diff and merge handlers. I haven't tried it, but I suspect you may be able to drive the interactive graphical versioning found in many word processors. I thought somebody had done some work on this, but I can't seem to dig up a link. -Peff