We've been through it before: making massive formatting changes can: a) break patches. Biggest reason, not the case here. But the point is that it sets (grr, continues) a precedent: what if someone was on vacation and not reading emails, and we all said, "I'm not touching that module, go ahead and reformat", and because they were away for the 3-day period in which the discussion happened, their patches are totally trashed. And don't say this is a "one time thing", because if we decide to change some rule later, some of the current code may be "in violation" of the new rule, or if we adopt another project, the first step is always: see if it works first, then worry about formatting later.
b) screw up svn modification history and IDE support of showing diffs, which trying to track down who changed something, it basically suddenly becomes "Robin/Sean did!" as the answer to every file. And frankly, I just hate having people (even not-me people!) running around just autoformatting stuff for the sake of it. It makes it the opposite of "easy and fun" for me. But as I said, I really don't feel like giving this a "-1" followed by a big backing-up-of-all-of-my-points as to "why", so I'll stick with the tried-and-true passive-aggressive Apache "-0" as my vote on this, and leave it at that, not really wanting to discuss it too much further. -jake On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > Nobody asked you to spend any time on anything though. Does it mess up a > patch? Say so and nothing would happen until ready. So not sure what other > issue is lurking here but lets discuss if needed rather than feel funny > about it. This should be easy and fun. > > On May 29, 2010 2:35 PM, "Jake Mannix" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ok, I'm done wasting time on this issue. People want to reformat > huge swaths of code, have a blast. > > > On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Sean Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Agree, which is why I'd ra... >
