grahamsedman commented on PR #13187:
URL: https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/pull/13187#issuecomment-4553862702

   Hi Everyone,
   
   Thank you for your review. I appreciate you flagging the formatting concern, 
and I acknowledge I should not have mixed clang-format changes with the 
functional fix in this PR.
   
   You're absolutely right that libswoc, as an external library, maintains its 
own formatting style and should be excluded from ATS formatting rules. I will 
revert all formatting changes from this PR and retain only the minimal 
functional fix that resolves the compile error.
   
   However, your point about the code existing in **multiple locations** is 
critical. My investigation confirms the confusion:
   - **Original repository**: 
[[SolidWallOfCode/libswoc](https://github.com/SolidWallOfCode/libswoc)](https://github.com/SolidWallOfCode/libswoc)
 (stale, 3+ years)
   - **Apache’s actively maintained external repository**: 
[[apache/trafficserver-libswoc](https://github.com/apache/trafficserver-libswoc)](https://github.com/apache/trafficserver-libswoc)
 (last commit: Mar 9, 2026)
   - **Vendored copy within ATS**: 
[[lib/swoc](https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/tree/master/lib/swoc)] 
(cloned from the external repository, but now out of sync).
   
   **The core issue**: The compile fix I’m proposing affects code duplicated 
across these repositories. To properly address this:
   
   1. **Immediate action**: I will update this PR to contain *only* the 
functional fix (no formatting changes) for the ATS vendored copy at `lib/swoc/`.
   2. **Longer-term solution**: I propose we either:
      - **Option A**: Convert `lib/swoc/` into a proper Git submodule linked to 
`apache/trafficserver-libswoc`, ensuring changes flow through the external 
repository first.
      - **Option B**: If libswoc is now considered part of ATS, remove the 
external repository dependency and apply ATS formatting rules consistently.
   
   The current state—with code duplicated across repositories—creates exactly 
the confusion we’re seeing. I’d be happy to create a separate issue to track 
this synchronisation problem.
   
   Would you prefer I proceed with **Option A** or **Option B** for the 
longer-term fix? For this PR, I’ll focus solely on the minimal compile fix 
without any formatting changes.
   
   Best regards,
   **Graham**


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to