The scalafmt changes shouldn’t create a large conflict if you apply the same scalafmt to the changes you are trying to apply, I have done this before in upstream projects.
-- Matthew de Detrich Aiven Deutschland GmbH Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen m: +491603708037 w: aiven.io e: [email protected] On 3. Nov 2022 at 11:56 +0100, Johannes Rudolph <[email protected]>, wrote: > On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 11:31 AM Daniel Schroeter <[email protected]> wrote: > > Please correct me if i am wrong but i think the "scalafmt" and "new > > package names" should be straight forward transformations that could be > > applied to the scala3 branch as well. > > This should not lead to a merge hell i believe. Wouldn't this also be a > > possible approach? > > In theory, it might work, can still be somewhat of a hassle which big > changes like this. But I agree, > if the Scala 3 merge is difficult or contentious, it should not hold > up the rest of the process. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >
