One test for this is to note when reasonable experts disagree on the correct action on a non-functional basis.
A key example is indentation. Nobody worth listening to makes an argument that bad indentation or the use of tabs directly causes a bug. A counter example is a behavior that is demonstrated by a unit test that is generally agreed to be incorrect. This process is obviously grounded in subjective meta-decisions, but the Zookeeper is probably not the right place to go too deeply into epistemology and the symbol grounding problem. Another test is to ask the community. If the community has consensus, then that is likely the right now. If the community does not have substantial preponderance of one opinion over another, then ask Ben. If you still disagree with the answer, you should probably think deeply about epistemology and speaker/listener symmetry, but you should do your thinking off-list. On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:11 PM, Thomas Koch <tho...@koch.ro> wrote: > Benjamin Reed: > > i know we have discussed this in the past, but we never really came to > > a consensus or policy, so i'd like to reopen the discussion on cleanup > > and subjective patches. > Just one question: Could you please try to elaborate on how a non > subjective > distinction could be made between "subjective" and "non-subjective" > patches? > > Regards, > > Thomas Koch, http://www.koch.ro >
