Colin Putney wrote:
[...]
> 2. We might introduce new forms of corruption. Consider a method with a 
> string literal containing CRLF. Ok, that's a strange thing to do, but it 
> should be possible to file that method out and read it in again.

Hmm... not that strange actually.  I wonder how CVS would deal with this 
:)  But that's a good point anyway; I think you've convinced me we 
should attempt to discover which line endings the file is using and then 
apply that consistently.

> I do think we've finally got Monticello where it needs to be. If any 
> really exotic use cases come up we can add them to the test suite and go 
> from there.

Agreed.

Julian