carlosgalvezp added inline comments.
================ Comment at: clang-tools-extra/docs/ReleaseNotes.rst:237 +- Fixed an issue in :doc:`google-avoid-underscore-in-googletest-name + <clang-tidy/checks/google/avoid-underscore-in-googletest-name>` when using ---------------- Eugene.Zelenko wrote: > Eugene.Zelenko wrote: > > carlosgalvezp wrote: > > > PiotrZSL wrote: > > > > carlosgalvezp wrote: > > > > > Eugene.Zelenko wrote: > > > > > > Please keep alphabetical order (by check name) in this section. > > > > > I was planning to do that but noticed that the alphabetical order is > > > > > already broken. It seems to be a source of friction and there's no > > > > > official documentation that states it should be done like that, so I > > > > > can understand if it gets broken often. Do you know if this is > > > > > documented somewhere? If not, do we see value in keeping this > > > > > convention? I suppose now we would need an NFC patch to fix the order > > > > > again, causing churn. > > > > I run into same issue also. I would say, let leave it as it is, and fix > > > > it with one commit at the end of release. > > > Good idea, let's do that! > > Often it's also broken after rebases which may be automatic. > Anyway, some kind of order is much better than disorder. Definitely. Could we stick to some simple convention? For example always append or prepend to the list of modifications to checks. Then before release we put up a patch for reordering. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D146655/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D146655 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list email@example.com https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits