I think we should relax the restrictions on patchfile naming currently 
implemented in port lint. I'd like to discuss it here before I file a ticket.

Currently, we complain if a patchfile is not named "patch-*.diff". But we 
already have many files in the repository named "*.patch" for example. We are 
proposing adding a job to the buildbot that automatically runs port lint, and 
we don't want it to complain about a requirement we're not following in 
practice anyway.

The only reason why I originally wanted a lint check was that we used to have 
patchfile names like "patch-*", with no separate extension. This resulted in 
patchfile names like "patch-foo.c", which, when opened into an editor that 
configures syntax highlighting based on filename extension, would be syntax 
highlighted as if they were a .c file, when it was desired to see syntax 
highlighting that was tailored for a diff.

I would be happy if lint were changed to just check that patchfile names end 
with .diff or .patch. Would anyone object to that?

Reply via email to