On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 9:21 PM, Bojan Smojver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Garrett Rooney [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Honestly, I loathe tabs as much as the next guy, but I actually
dislike the idea of wholesale reformatting because it makes it harder
to figure out where a bit of code came from
Topic for a fun conversation: Should we detab the various
APR source? We've never really instituted a specific coding
style, ala httpd, but 1.3.x might not be a bad place to start.
I'm proposing this for post-1.3.1 release, btw :)
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Jim Jagielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Topic for a fun conversation: Should we detab the various
APR source? We've never really instituted a specific coding
style, ala httpd, but 1.3.x might not be a bad place to start.
I'm proposing this for post-1.3.1
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Topic for a fun conversation: Should we detab the various
APR source? We've never really instituted a specific coding
style, ala httpd, but 1.3.x might not be a bad place to start.
I'm proposing this for post-1.3.1 release, btw :)
+1.
It makes it far easier to stick to a
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Topic for a fun conversation: Should we detab the various
APR source? We've never really instituted a specific coding
style, ala httpd, but 1.3.x might not be a bad place to start.
I'm proposing this for post-1.3.1 release, btw :)
Please don't :( Detab trunk/ if you would
Jim Jagielski wrote:
We've never really instituted a specific coding
style, ala httpd
Suppose it's time to fix http://apr.apache.org/guidelines.html ;-)
Wish I had free cycles.
Will do trunk then...
On Jun 13, 2008, at 3:27 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Topic for a fun conversation: Should we detab the various
APR source? We've never really instituted a specific coding
style, ala httpd, but 1.3.x might not be a bad place to start.
I'm
Hmmm... the issue with that, however, is that backports
to 1.3 will come from trunk (mostly) and they won't apply
cleanly if trunk is detab but 1.3 is entab.
On Jun 13, 2008, at 3:36 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
Will do trunk then...
On Jun 13, 2008, at 3:27 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim
, btw :)
Honestly, I loathe tabs as much as the next guy, but I actually
dislike the idea of wholesale reformatting because it makes it harder
to figure out where a bit of code came from.
For example, trying to track down the commit some problematic code
came from changes from the old way:
1
On 06/13/2008 09:27 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Jim Jagielski wrote:
Topic for a fun conversation: Should we detab the various
APR source? We've never really instituted a specific coding
style, ala httpd, but 1.3.x might not be a bad place to start.
I'm proposing this for post-1.3.1
Ruediger Pluem wrote:
But if we do only in trunk and not in 1.3.x I guess backports become
much harder as svn merge tends to fail more often.
So I would propose to do on trunk *AND* 1.3.x.
Regarding the noise: I guess detabing 1.3.x is more of one off thing
and clearly labeled commit messages
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Garrett Rooney
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's just a pain. I much more prefer reformatting to meet style
guidelines as code is modified for some other reason.
+1.
Do it for 2.x, but not during the 1.x timeline. -- justin
Quoting Garrett Rooney [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Honestly, I loathe tabs as much as the next guy, but I actually
dislike the idea of wholesale reformatting because it makes it harder
to figure out where a bit of code came from.
Exactly.
It's just a pain. I much more prefer reformatting to meet
13 matches
Mail list logo
