Hi, some third-party input on this issue, in the hope that it can help solve this little different.
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007, Ian Jackson wrote: > > Some weeks ago I started considering applying them anyway, although > > by reverting the formatting changes (which I think should be done > > regardless, otherwise the diff gets quite messy). > > I think failing to apply that change immediately is a mistake. > > The patch I sent in #375711 is purely the reversion of something that > is clearly an earlier mistake. The only change I made there is to > return the indent width from actual tabs implying 8-column-per-indent > to the 2-column-per-indent which is used in all of the rest of the C > and C++ code in the whole of dpkg and which was used in previous > versions of these very same files. I agree that it's best if the indentation in all the C code is consistent. In that regard, I'd suggest to apply the patch. However I clearly dislike the 2-char indent (4 chars are the minimum IMO to be readable) and wouldn't oppose a mass reformat later on. > This change should be made immediately _even if you think the > currently predominant style ought to be changed_ because it increases > the consistency and because it undoes a previous unintentional and > undesirable change. I think the changes were intentionnal. It's just that Guillem finds more reasonable to convert slowly the formatting as he works through the code. As it happens, I disagree with this point of view. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
