> There is no technical point, but there is a social point. The point would be > to allow the changes to be easier for committers to review in small > digestable chunks, without having to split the changeset themselves, they are > doing it in their own time, don't try to take up their free time in a big > chunk. The whitespace commits are exactly the sort of thing that can be done > in independent chunks. If its a small chunk with only whitespace changes I > can look at it and help @b4n, but if its a big lump I'm not going to take > that much time out of the other things I'm doing.
There's no reason to spend much time on reviewing the whitespace stuff - all the files will eventually get replaced by the current uctags files. I think it would be possible to simply grab all uctags files and put them into Geany's ctags directory (and adjust to our needs) but since there have been something like 12 years of independent developments of both ctags versions I want to make sure I don't miss some of the Geany's patches of ctags so I'm doing it gradually. > Thats fine, but that should be separate from whitespace changes. It is a separate commit but I couldn't make it a separate pull request at this time - it depends on the whitespace stuff and if I made two separate pull requests affecting the same lines it would lead to terrible merge conflicts (which I really don't want to resolve). But if it's the preferred way I can drop this patch for now and once/if the rest gets merged, open a new pull request for it. By the way, the majority of the code the patches touch is a dead code in Geany - it's things like reading source files, creating ctags files, reading command-line parameters etc. which we don't use at all in Geany. So really no need to spend much time here. --- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/geany/geany/pull/1160#issuecomment-237414504
