* On 31 Aug 2016, Damien Riegel wrote: > > Fair enough! There are some guidelines [1] but maybe they could be more > detailed to have consistent style for new contributions. For instance, > the expected output of `indent` is not obvious, and it seems to be > missing some arguments to be closer to what the actual code base looks > like (ex: most fuctions declarations have their types and names on the > same line, so -npsl should be added as argument). > > [1] https://dev.mutt.org/trac/wiki/CodingStyle
Indeed, and it doesn't help that there are at least three common versions of indent (with differing options) in the wild. That needs to be specified too, or we could just adopt uncrustify or some other tool that's less ambiguous. I'm not particular until we start bikeshedding. ;) I suggest that we decide upon a style and a target release (1.8? 1.9?) where that style will be applied to the whole code base. Apply the style from up top, using rules that are in the repo and no manual tweaks, between code freeze and release. We can put it in a commit hook and document installing that hook in the developer notes. Then we can be more hard-set about style conformance in patches afterward. -- David Champion • [email protected]
