On Thu, May 5, 2011 at 1:57 AM, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > On May 4, 2011, at 11:40 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: >> Documentation may be a bit more relaxed, and if you have one doc >> maintainer approve and the other abstain that may be more boring >> that you might hope for. :-) > > Actually, I was aiming for a global person to ack gcc/*... This could be > less boring that just gcc/doc. :-)
I think I was the one complaining loudest when HJ checked in his patch. And I still think such patches are a) pointless b) cause harm to some subjective degree. Coding style rules are nice, but if they cause any degree of harm when enforcing them they are IMHO only guildelines, not hard rules (after all, if they were we'd have a commit hook that verifies new violations do not slip in). And yes, in "harm" I mostly refer to svn blame annoyances and to patch/branch merge conflicts where context that causes the conflict only changed in whitespace. Richard.
