The trouble is that UTF-8 is a poor standard. It bloats many texts, is quite expensive to parse, and has only one redeeming feature: It never creates embedded nulls. I suppose that it shares its encoding with ASCII is a feature too, but only a minor one.
Personally, I think that most systems should adopt SCSU as their storage encoding, but that's unlikely to happen until C strings and MIME (two paragons of awfulness) die out. On 25 June 2010 16:00, Michael Richter <ttmrich...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 25 June 2010 21:34, Michal Suchanek <hramr...@centrum.cz> wrote: >> >> Perhaps fossil should have a "system encoding" which it would get from >> the environment (locales, windows codepage) and mark all commit >> messages with it. > > I vote that this is an extraordinarily bad idea. > Fossil is a distributed SCM system. Potentially the distributed database in > question could be spread around the world. Do you really want the nightmare > (and impossibility!) of trying to keep track of which project is in which > encoding scheme on which machine? UTF-8 is a standard explicitly designed > to stop this kind of confusion. It's also been around since 1993, so your > development tools have had plenty of time to catch on and actually use it. > -- > "Perhaps people don't believe this, but throughout all of the discussions of > entering China our focus has really been what's best for the Chinese people. > It's not been about our revenue or profit or whatnot." > --Sergey Brin, demonstrating the emptiness of the "don't be evil" mantra. > > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > > _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
