On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 09:39:21PM +0200, Christian Couder wrote:
> > If you prefer the normalized form (and the input was line-broken in a
> > way that you don't like), then this would convert to your preferred
> > form. I agree that you could potentially want the opposite (folding long
> > lines). Perhaps something like --wrap=72.
> Related to this, I wonder if people might want to "normalize" in
> different ways later. If that happens, we might regret having called
> this option "--normalize" instead of "--one-per-line" for example.
My assumption was that it would be OK to add other normalization later
if it brings us closer to the "key: value" form as a standard, and it
could fall under "--normalize", since that's what callers would want.
And that's why I didn't want to call it something like --one-per-line.
But if you are arguing that there can be many "standards" to normalize
to, I agree that's a possibility. I think we have an out by extending to
"--normalize=whatever-form" in the future.